IMAGE EVALUATION TEST TARGET (MT-3) 1.0 I.I l^giS |2.5 |5o "^" !!■■ ^~ ■:: 12.0 L8 ^ IIM U^ v; 7, O 7 /^ / J Wj. / Hiotographic Sdences Corporation 23 WIST MAIN STRiET WEBSTER, N.Y. MS80 (716) 872-4S03 CIHM/ICMH Microfiche Series. CIHM/ICIVIH Collection de microfiches. Canadian Instituta for Hiatorical Microraproductiont Institut Canadian da microraproductiona hiatoriquaa 1980 Technical and Bibliographic Notas/Notas tachniquas at bibliographiquat Tha inatituta has attamptad to obtain tha bast original copy available for filming. Features of this copy which may be bibliographically unique, which may alter any of the images in the reproduction, or which may significantly change the usual method of filming, are checked below. n D D n n □ Coloured covers/ Couverture de couleur I I Covers damaged/ Couverture endommagie Covers restored and/or laminated/ Couverture restaurie et/ou pelliculie I I Cover title missing/ Le titre de couverture manque I I Coloured maps/ Cartes giographiques en couleur Coloured inic (i.e. other than blue or blacit)/ Encre de couleur (i.e. autre que bleue ou noire) I I Coloured plates and/or illustrations/ Planches et/ou illustrations en couleur Bound with other material/ ReiiA avac d'autres documents r~2 Tight binding may cause shadows or distortion along interior margin/ La reliure serr^e peut causer de I'ombre ou de la distortion le long de la marge intirieure Blank leaves added during restoration may appear within tha text. Whenever possible, these have been omitted from filming/ II se peut que certaines pages blanches ajout6es lors d'une restauration apparaissant dans la taxte, mais, lorsque cela 6tait possible, ces pages n'ont pas 6t6 film6as. Additional comments:/ Commentairas suppl^mentaires; Th to L'instltut a microfilm* la meilleur exemplaire qu'il lul a 4t6 poasibia de se procurer. Les details da cet exemplaire qui sont peut-Atre uniques du point de vue bibliographiqua, qui peuvent modifier une image reproduite, ou qui peuvent exiger une modification dans la mAthode normale de f ilmage sont indiqute ci-dessous. I I Coloured pages/ Pages de couleur Pages damaged/ Pages endommag6es □ Pages restored and/or laminated/ Pages restaurias et/ou peliicuiies Pages discoloured, stained or foxed/ Pages dicolories, tachaties ou piqu^es Th po of fill Or be thi sic oti fin sic or j I Pages detached/ D Pages ddtachtos Showthrough/ Transparence Quality of prir Qualiti in^gaia da I'impression Includes supplementary matafif Comprend du material suppiimentaira Only edition available/ Seule Edition disponible r~l Showthrough/ I I Quality of print varies/ I I Includes supplementary material/ I I Only edition available/ Th sh Til wl M) dil en be rig re( mi Pages wholly or partially obscured by errata slips, tissues, etc., have been refilmed to ensure the best possible image/ Les pages totalement ou partiellement obscurcies par un fauillet d'errata, une pelure, etc., ont 6t6 film6es d nouvaau de fapon A obtenir la meillaure image possible. This item is filmed at tha reduction ratio checked below/ Ce document est film* au taux da rMuction indiquA ci-dessous. 10X 14X 18X 22X 26X 30X J V 12X 16X 20X UX 28X J2X tails du idifier une Tiage The copy filmed here hat been reproduced thanlcs to the generosity of: National Library of Canada The images appearing here are the best quality possible considering the condition and legibility of the original copy and in keeping with the filming contract specifications. Original copies in printed paper covert are filmed beginning with the front cover and ending on the last page with a printed or Illustrated impres- sion, or the back cover when appropriate. All other original copies are filmed beginning on the first page with a printed or illustrated impres- sion, and ending on the last page with a printed or iiluttrated imprettion. The last recorded frame on each microfiche shall contain the symbol — ^> (meaning "CON- TINUED"), or the symbol y (meaning "END"), whichever applies. Maps, plates, c»r^. ^s. etR.. may be filmed at different reductioi ratios. Those too large to be entirely included in one exposure are filmed beginning in the upper left hand corner, left to right and top to bottom, as many frames as required. The following diagrams illustrate the method: L'exemplaire filmA fut reprodult grAce A la g6n*rosit6 de: BibliothAque nationale du Canada Las images suivantes ont At6 reprodultes avec le plus grand soin. compte tenu de la condition at de la nettetA de l'exemplaire film*, et en conformity avec les conditions du contrat de fllmage. Les exemplaires originaux dont la couverture en papier est imprimte sont filmte en commen^ant par le premier plat et en termlnant soit par la dernidre page qui comporte une e npreinte d'impression ou d'illustratlon, solt par le second plat, salon le cas. Tous les autres exemplaires originaux sont filmte en commen9ant par !a premiere page qui comporte une emprelnte d'impression ou d'iiiustration et en termlnant par la derniftre page qui comporte une telle emprelnte. Un des symboles suivants apparaTtra sur la dernlAre image de cheque microfiche, selon le cas: le symbols — ► signifie "A SUIVRE". le symbole V signifie "FIN". Les cartes, pir.iches. tableaux, etc.. pei )/ent Atre fllmAs A des taux de rAduction diffArents. Lorsque le document est trop grand pour Atre reprodult en un seul clichA. il est filmA A partir de I'angle supArieur gauche, de gauche A droite. et de haut en bas, en prenant le nombre d'images nAcessaire. Les diagrammes suivants illustrbnt la mAthode. irrata to pelure. n A 1 J2X 1 2 3 1 2 3 4 5 6 '.t- ( g: Lb Bhalt S.i' tm^ .t 4 BIBLICAL EXPOSITOR / / Aim PEOPLE'S COMMENTARY; CONTAIKINO ACCURATE TRANSLATIONS FROM THE HEBREW OF DIFFICULT PASSAGES OF THE OLD TESTAMENT, WITH CRITICAL, HISTORICAL, AND EXPLANATORY NOTES OF THE SAME; TOGETHER WITH A COMPLETE HISTORY OF HEBREW LITERATURE FROM THE EARLIEST TIMES. • . DESIONEU AS A GENERAL TI ELP T( ) BIBLICAL READING AND INSTRUCTION BY JACOB M. HIRSCHFELDER, Lectuber in Oriental Literature, University College, Toronto. Authob OF "Reply TO Bishop Colenso," "Essay on the Spirit and Charac- teristics OF Hebrew Poetry," "Treatise on the Immortality of the Soul," "Critical Lectures on Genesis I.," &c. n ill- "It thou Bceke! Mtamiaox, DIRECTIONS FOR THE READING OP HEBREW WORDS EXPRESSED IN ENQLISH CHARACTERS IN THIS WORK. IT is somewhat difficult to express Hebrew words in English characters, owing to some letters of the former language having a two-fold sound, whilst others are altogether quiescent, and, again, a few have no >^ pyt^*-^ Sucli, for exainpk', was the line of argument adopted by the 'tv~r^ K^Ay\f^^-J. Rev. (J. W. Goodwin, M. A., in his " Essay on the Mosaic Cos- q j-. • ^ *'- mogonv," which forms a i)art of the well-known work called ^ '"'*' ''^] ^'Vx lt\^ Mosaic account of the location of the irarden of Eden, for mstiuicc, w(> are told that tlie dt'seriptiuu can only lie made intelli^-ihle if we take into consideration tlic inqierfect knowl- edge of •,f(H)i,'raphy then. j)rcvailing. That ^b>ses speaks of four rivers as having one source, or at hast as liasing a conHiiciice, wlicn on the contrary two of the four rivers ate widely separated and How in opposite din.'ctions. On a ch»se investigation, how- ever, I think it can be clearly shown that the g(>ograplncal desci iption by the sacred writer is (|uite correct, and given with great nnnuteness ; and that these writers wlio would impugn the Mosaic account have themselves fallen into an error by BBBBB INTRODUCTION. i] *#* • • • • mistaking the identity of the two rivers. This subject will be fully treatr 1 hereafter in the Commentary. Again, we are seriously told that on comparing the first and second chapters of Genesis, we can come to no other conclusion than that they were written by two distinct authors. The reasons assigned for adopting this hypothesis are, in the first place, in the first chapter of Genesis the term Elohim {%. e., God) IB constantly used, whilst in the second chapter from the fourth verse to the end of the chapter the term Jehovah Elohim (i. e., Lord God) always occurs. And, secondly, in ch. i. 20-27, the fowls and beasts are represented as having been created before Adam and Eve, whilst according to ch. ii. 7, 19, 22, Adam is created before the birds and beasts, and Eve after both. The explanation which we shall hereafter give of these peculiarities, will, I am sure, convince the reader, that there is no necessity whatever for adopting a theory of different authorship. The Mosaic account of the deluge, has likewise been chal- lenged. Here we are asked where is such a quantity of water to come from as, according to the account, would be required ? And as for the ark itself, its capacity is not only declared to be quite insufficient, but the whole structure is pronounced as altogether unfit. We shall hereafter see what grounds there are for such sweeping decharations. The whole Mosaic account of the bondage of the Israelites in Egypt is most vehemently assailed and declared altogether unhistorical, inconsistent, and contradictory. They point, for instance, to Exodus vi. 3, where it is said, " And I a])pt'ared to Abraham, to Isaac, and to Jacob, by the name of {El tiJidddai) God Almighty, but by my name Jehovah was I not known to them." Here our critics ask, how can this statement be recon- ciled that the patriarchs did not know God by the name " Jkhovah," when on the contrary we find God Himself speak- ing under that name to Abiaham, "And he said to him, I am Jehovah who brought thee out of Ur of the Chaldees," (Gen. XV. 7) and again in other places : And when we find oven the patriarchs tlaemselvos fi'equently using it, as for example, Gen. xxii. 14, where Abraham called the name of a place '' Jehovah- 'jireh." It is no wonder that a question like this sliould stagger an ordinary reader of the Bible, when it has puzzled many commentators. And yet, there is really no difficulty in finding a most satisfactory reply to this apparently perplexing ques- tion. But not only are such isolated passages of the Pentateuch Jis those above noted assailed, lint the genuineness of the greatest portions of the books of Moses is now questioned, and especially is that the case with respect to the book of Deuteronomy. From the time that Vater, at the beginning of this century, INTRODUCTION. set out on his crusade against the Pentateuch, the warfare has continued with increasing fierceness from year to year, and spread from country to country, until at last its war-cry is even heard in countries whose orthodoxy was deemed a sufficient bulwark against any such invasion. The question of authorship, even in case of a secular work, often attracts a great deal of attention, as for example, the celebrated " Letters of Junius," ascribed to various persons, which still remain, a literary puzzle. But when such a question in- volves the verity of the whole Scriptures, then language fails in adequately describing its importance. It is, therefore, my intention to give this all-important question of the authorship of the books of Moses the fullest consideration, and lay it before the reader in as plain a manner as possible, so that he may be able to form an intelligent opinion himself on this much contested question which now so imminently threatens to dis- turb the jieace of the religious world. Critici.sm is, however, not merely confined to the Pentateuch, the other books of Scripture have their Colensos also ; and the student of the Bible may, therefore, when least expected, be confronted with some ])uzzling, if not, indeed, very diHicult question. Let me give a few examples so that the reader may see that this is not a bugbear set up merely to frighten — no, it is not to frighten, but to give a timely warning in order to be prepared for it. In 1 Kings vi. 1, it is said, that " In the four hundred and eightieth year after the children of Israel were come out of the land of Eg}'pt, in the fourth year of Solomon's roign over Israel in the niontli of Zif, which ?'« the second month, that he began to build the house of the Loiio." Now Josephus, gives the time to be " five hundred and ninety-two ;" and so does Deme- trius, who wrote the history of the Jewish Kings, during the reign of Ptolomy Philopater, and which, no doubt is tiie coi'rect time. Here then we have a ditiorence of 112 yenrs to be accounted for. The favourite mode of getting over the diffi- euluy among commentators has been, by supposing, either that the Hebrew text has been corrupte(l, ortliat the number has not originally existed in the text. But for what object should the number have been altered or inserted ? And l^y Avhom ? Surely not by the Hebrews, who evinocd such a serupulons rei^nvd and veneration for the sacred text, that when a revision of the Biblical text was undertaken by the celebrated Jewish doctors generally calletl Alasoritefi, they would not even alter or insert a single letter in words erroneously written — ejrors which no doubt originated through the carelessness of traiiscril)ers — but rather su tiered such erroneously written words to remain in the text, and placed the emendation in the margin. We must, there- ^m^mmiKfmma S2 ^1 xii. INTBODnOTION. fore, look for a more consistent explanation of the difficulty, and this will be found in one of the cariona or rules of criticism of the ancient Jewish Babbies contained in the Talmud. The canon referred to declares " that the ancient Jews never counted the time that the nation was under foreign servitude, for the nation was then considered dead." Now, let us see whether this rule applies here. If the reader will turn to the book of Judges, he will find the different periods that the Israelites were given over to foreign nations for their wickedness to be as follows : Judges iii. '8. — To the king of Mesopotamia .. 8 years, " iii. 14.— To the Moabites 18 " iv. 3.— To Jabin, king of Canaian 20 " " vi. 1.— To the Midianites 7 " X. 8.— To the Philistines and Amorites. 18 " " xiii. 1.— To the Philistines 40 " 111 " Odd months, always reckoned with the preced- ing year 1 " V ^ • 112 « Here, then, we have the apparent discrepancy accounted for in a most satisfactory manner ; and it is, in my opinion, one of the strongest proofs of the authenticity of the books of Kings themselves, for no impostor would have ever dreamed of giving a number whose historical correctness can only be sustained by an appeal to a peculiar national custom. The book of Job, though universally admired as a b'illiant literary gem, has nevertheless not been allowed to escape the fievy ordeal of modern criticism, by which it is sought to deprive it of the greatest portion of its importance. The book itself furnishes the most conclusive proofs of high antiquity; yet, not- withstanding these, a comparatively late date is astsignoJ to it on mere trivial grounds. But this is by no means the worst part: some of our modern critics are not contented to stop here, but, having first, as a preliminary ste[>, divested the book of its antiijuity, they next proceed to strip it of its true character by declaring it to be merely an allegorical production. Happily, however, there is not Avanting conclusive i)roof of the book .setting forth a real occurrence, as we hoje to show here- after to the entire satisfaction of the reader. The book of Daniel has siiared ii similar fate; at the hands of modern critics ; indeed, the German critic Auberlcn, who writes in defence of the book, in noticing the strenuous efforts put forth to impugn its authenticity, remarks, "Die U iidcktheit INTKODUCTION. XIU. ^.- Daniels ist in der modemen Theologie zum Axiom gewor- den" i. e., The spuriousness of the book of Daniel has become -^ ^ an axiom in modern theology ; and Dr. Williams, an English %? l^i^^^^'^ divine, and formerly a teacher of the youth, in Essays, p, 76, '[Z.^^Ai-o^^^-^^^^^ S^ says, " It is one of the highest triumphs and most saving facts J^^^o^*^ t^iT of the more lecent criticism to have proved t *< the book of Daniel belongs to the time of Antiochus Epiphanes :" that is to say, about 400 years after Daniel's death. As I may not be able to extend my commentary to the book of Daniel, for it has always been my practice to do a little carefully rather than do much carelessly, I will take this early oppoi'tunity of placing before the reader the principal objections urged against the authenticity of this prophetical book, and point out upon what shallow arguments they are based. One rc^.son assigned for placing the book at a later period, and upon which great stress is laid is, that " Certain events are foretold with such a minuteness as to prove cldarly that they must have been written after they had taken place." But if Daniel was an inspired prophet, where is the difficulty to com- prehend his foretelling future events in a precise manner any more than his merely alluding to them ? And, after all, the taking of Jerusalem and the desecration of the Temple by Antiochus Epiphanes is not more vividly foretold by Daniel than the downfall of the last king of Babylon by Isaiah (see ch. xiv.), or indeed many future occurrences by othei- prophets. The prophet is merely the ])aKsive agent in the hand of God, and with God nothing is impossil)le. Do Wetto, in his " Critical and Historical Introduction to the Canonical Scriptures of tlio Old Testament," (vol. ii., p. 488,) says, "It appeal's Daniel is not the author of the book. It is full of improbabilities. Nebuchadnezzar demands that the wise men should tell him the dream he had forgotten, and threatens to put them to death in case of their inability to obey his command." — (Dan. ch. ii. 3, et f^cq.) And where is the improba- bility in all this? It is well known that the wise men of the east from the ciirliest times professed to be able to disclose hidden things, to foretell events, and above all, were exceedingly export in pcifonuing things by sleight of hand, with which they im- posed on the higher as well as the lower classes. In our days ; we may instance the pretended snake-charmers of India and Egy])t. It is also well known that both high and low placed the gioatest confidence in those magicians and sorcerers, for they always had immediate recourse to titein. But superstition knows no bounds, and when the mind becomes once under its inllneiice iiotliini' seems too extiavairant, and hence we find Nebuchadnezzar on this occasif)n expects e\en inoie from the wise men than they ever professed to lie able to pei-forin — he XIV. INTRODUCTION. :•■] wants them to tell the dream which ho had forgotten. This is by no means strange ; he would naturally have supposed that it would involve no greater degree of wisdom to tell the dieam than to tell the interpretation of it. That such an idea per- vaded the King's mind is evident, for he says: "Therefore tell me the dream, and I shall know that ye can shew me the inter- pretation thereof." Then as regards the King's threatening to put the wise men to death in case of their inability to ohey his command ; this is quite in accordance with the despotism of the ancient monarchs. To this may be adiled, that tliese super- natural dreams — for such in reality they were — seemed to have left an exceedingly depressing efiect on the dreamer, wliieh at once portended that their import was of the highest signifi cance, as is clearly indicated by the great anxiety alw ay.s evinced to have them interpreted. Thus we read also iliut Joseph found the butler and the baker of Pharaoh sad in i\ui morning after they had each dreamed a dream. (Gen. xl.) So likewise of Pharoah it is said: " And it came to pass in the morning that his spirit was troubled, and he sent and called for all the magicians of Egypt, and all the wise men tliereof " ((Jen. xli. 8.) The image of gold which Nebuchadnezzar had set uj) in tho plain of Dura offered likewise a target against which nposed that the dream Lii idea per- lerefore tell le the inter- ejitening to to obey his espotisiu of ;he.se supei"- ned to have T, which at lest signifi ays evinced liat Joseph ]ui morning Ho hkewise lorniiif; that for all the (len. xli, 8.) ;t uj) in the h not a few ritieisni.and d in deniol- |st place, its 1 altogether finally, its loubt l)een e trouble to tions. The expendi- al together ration, that xtravagant, jrent light. see similar place of the Temple like those lany apart- ition of the ceremony ous officers highest to m posing a iltitude of r people from far and near, and, indeed, from the formula em- ployed by the crier, "to you it w commanded, 0 people, nations, and lanj>iia<^c<* ' (v. 4), it would appear that a great concourse had asseni'tled. As all were required to fall down and worship the im.i-v, it was necessaiy that it should be distinctly seen by all ; tins itself would render a high image necessary. Still there can be no doubt that the unnecessary height of the inia'-'e was designedly in older to make its appearance more imposing, and in order to obtain this object more fully, even syniniotry was disregarded. Tlunvare many able writers who suppose that the image was placed iiiitiH a high pedestal, and that both together made up the GO eiiMts. Now although the language of the text does not prechnle such a supposition, still we are by no means dis- p(jsed to insist upon it. The natural construction of the language seems rather to imply that the image was of that dimension. But even so, why should Biblical critics lind more ditlieulties with Scri])ture statements than with similar state- ments in secular works ? Have those writers ever found fault with tlie aeeounfc given by Pliny of the colossal statue of Helios prtsciited by Demetrius to the Uhodians as a tribute to their valour. This figure was made of brass; and its height is given as seventy cubits, which would make it about fifteen feet biglur than Nebucliadnezzar's image, and it is said to have taken twelve years to make it. (Plin. H. N. xxxiv. 18.) Pliny mentions another colossal ligure llO feet kjng, which was made in his own time by Zenodorus for Nero, and which was after- wards dedicated to the sun. But in)mense as those images above allud'd to were, they arc altogether outstripped in size by the giant foi ni of an idol which the Manjuis de Beauvoir has se(?n. I u d( scribing the pagoda of Xetuphon, the Marquis says : "Imagine yourself with us beneath a colonnade of teak- wood, and in an innnense sanctuary, where the god is extended his full length ; and this is no small matter, for he mea.sured 150 feet froni t'le shoulder to the sole of his feet. This gigantic body, in masonry, is conq)letely and entirely gilt. It lies on the riglit side : a gilded terrace, ornamented with sculpture, serves for his couch. His head, of which the summit is eighty feet above the ground, is supported by the right arm, which rests towards the entrance of the door. His left arm is exten- ded along the thigh ; his eyes are silver, his lips pink enamel, and on his head is a crown of gold. We look like Lilliputians around G ilivei-, and if we try to climb up upon him, we disap- pear altogether in his nostrils ; one of his nails is taller than any of us. We stood amazed before this Titanic work, of which the architect can only have been i)aid by the riches of a Croesus. This gigantic casting of the purest gold, must be XVI. INTRODUCrON. C-m^/a^-'^ lyn.^ 'th^^r^'^K ^ worth millions; each sheet of metal (and there must have- been thousands) is nearly two square feet in size, and weighs, they tell us, 450 ounces of gold, ' (Voyage Autour du Monde, vol. 2, pp. 281, 282, translated in "A Week in the Kingdom of Siam," p. 244.) We tfoubt not many other colossal images of idols might be found if we searched the temples of India, but the examples we have adduced will suffice to show that great height of imnge- idols was regarded of the gi-eatest importance to give the idol an imposiiig and terrifying appearance. But our critics are also staggered by the quantity of gold it must have taken in constructing an image of such cilossal dimension, and ask " wliere Nebuchadnezzar could possibly have obtained the enormous quantity required, if, indeed it existed at that time in tlie whole world ? " J. D. Michaelis took the trouble to obtain from a celebrated mathematician a valuation of the quantity that must liave been used, who taking the common cubit of the Hebrews, namely, eighteen inches — for the sacred cubit was twenty-one inches — as his basis, and making proper allowance for the admixture of other metals, found that tlie amount of gold required reached the enormous sum of upwards of 8,400 million dollars. We have not the slightest intention of questioning the correctness of this calcu- lation ; but where, we would ask, is there any ground for sup- posing that the image was of solid gold ? The Hebrews, in common with other nations, were accustomed to speak of objects which were overlaid with ])late of copper or gold as it they were made of these metals. It is well known that the bodies of heathen idols were generally of wood or earthenware, and merely overlaid Avith a plate of gold. Of such the ])rophet Isaiah speaks, " The workman casteth a graven image, and the goldsmith spreadeth it over with gold, and forgeth silver chains." (I3. xl. 19.) Jeremiah also alludes to such a practice : ch. x. 3, 4. Amonij: the Hebrews articles overlaid with brass or gold were employed at a very earl 3' period. In I]xodus xxvii. 1, 2, Moses is comnmnded to make an altar of shittim wood five cubits long, five cubits broad, and three cubits high, and overlay the same with brass, and again, in ch. xxx. 1, 2, 3, he is coninianded to make an altar of shittim wood one cubit s(juaie to burn incense upon, and to overlay it with pure gold. Now in ch. .xxxix. 88, 89, these very two altars are spoken of as " the golden altar," and " the brazen altar." It was no doubt from tlie costly and heavy plate of gold employed in covering such articles tlmt they were s])oken of as ;jolden, and this ought certainly not to 1)e regarded as strange, when we are aecu.s- tomed to speak of eUctr()-2)lated di fides as aWvevwiUv. INTRODUCTION. XVll. We may yet produce another passage from this book which has been challenged Jis containing statements which are his- torically incon'ect. The passage in question is found in Dan. iv, 26, 27. (Eng. vers. vv. 29, 30.) " At tho end of the twelve months he walked upon the palace of tbo king- dom of Babylon. The king spake, and said, is not this great Babylon, that I have built for the house of the kingdom by the might of my power, and for the honour of my majesty T " It is here objected that Nebuchadnezzar is represented as having built Babylon, while history clearly teaches that his fpther, Nabopolassar, had already established it as the seat of his new empire; and that before him for a long period it had already been the residence of Assyrian governors. Now it is quite true that, strictly speaking, Nebuchadnezzar cannot bo said to have been the actual founder of Babylon, and yet, according to the oriental mode of speaking, and, indeed, even according to the usage that prevails among us, the statement is perfectly correct. The orientals are accustomed to speak of a greater portion as a tvhole, and Scripture furnishes a great number of examples of this mode of expression. As one of the most striking examples, and one which has not escaped the searching eyes of our modern critics, I may refer the reader to Exod. ix. 25 : " And the hail smote throughout all the land of Egypt all that was in tho field, both man and beast ; and the hail smote every herb of the field, and brake every tree of the field." Let the reader now notice the words " all," " every," in the above passage, and then turn to ch. x. 14, 15, where we read : " And the locusts went up over all the land of Egypt, and rested in all the coasts of Egypt : very grievous were they; before them there were no such locusts as they, neither after them shall be such. For they covered the face of the whole earth, so that the land was darkened; and they did eat every herb of the land, and all the fruit of the trees which the haii had left." It will thus be seen that the expressions " all," " every," in ch. ix. 25, can only mean the greater portion. In Genesis vi. 17, we read : " And behold I, even I, do bring tho flood of waters upon the earth, to destroy all flesh wherein is the breath of life, from under heaven ;" but " all" cannot include Noah, his sons, his wife, and his son's wives, nor those living creatures which could subsist in the water. And do we not ourselves frequently make use of similar hyperbolilical expressions ? Surely, when we say, that " the whole city went to see the great sight ;" or " the whole nation is up in arms," we do not wish to be understood "the whole" without an exception. And, precisely in this way must be • •• xvin. INTRODUCTION. understood the expression of Nebuchadnezzar, not that he was the actual founder of it, but that he greatly enlarged, embel- lished, nnd otherwise contributed to make Babylon to be spoken of as one of the wonders of the world. And how does this agree with the well established historical facts ? Let us hear what Josephus says on this subject, who drew his information from Beiosus the great Chaldean historian who flourished about 2(j0 B. (J., and who in compiling his history made use of tlie oldest archives of the temples. Having given an account of the exploits of Nebuchadnezzar, who was then but young, against the Governor of Egypt who had rebelled against his father, and of his hearing of his father's death whilst still in that country, and hastening back to Babylon, Josephus giving Berosus's own account, goes on to say : " Accordingly he now entirely obtained all his father's dominions. He then came, and ordered the captives to be placed as colonies in the most proper ]>laces of Babylonia but for himself, he adorned the temple of Belus, and other temples, after an elegant manner, out of the spoils he had taken in this war. He also rebuilt the old city, and added another to it on the outside," I would draw the reader's particular attention to these statements — "and so far restored Babylon, that none who should besiege it afterwards might have the i)Ower to divert the river, so as to facilitate the entrance into it ; and this he did by building three walls about the inner city, and three about the outer. Some of these walls he built of burnt brick and bitumen, and some of brick only. So when ho had tlms tbrtifled the city with walls, after an excellent manner, and had adorned the gates magnifi- cently, he added a new palace to that which his father had dwelt in, and this close b}'^ it also, and that more eminent in height, and in great splendour. It would perhaps i-eijuire too long a narrative, if any one were to describe it. However, as prodigiously large and magnificent as it was, it was finished in fifteen days." There must evidently have been an error in the manuscrij)t, or the number indistinctly written. Probably the right time may have heeu Jifteen months, or only one hun- dred a)ul Jiftcen dai/tf. The time given in the text is alto- getliei" out of question, no matter how many workmen were at woik at it. " Now in this palace he erected very high walls, supported by stone pillars, and by planting what was called a yciDidc paradise, and replenishing it with all sorts of trees, he rendered the prospect of an exact resemblance of a mountain- ous country. This he did to please his queen, because she had btjen brought up in Media, and was fond of a mountainous situation." Josephus against Apio7i, ch. 1, sec. 1.9. Also, A^iti- quities, b. x., ch. 11, sec. 1. Herodotus, the oldest Greek historian, and therefore com- INTRODUCTION. XiZ monly called the " Father of History," was bom 484 B.C., and therefore tiourished several centuries br'fore Herosua. Ho Imd himself visited Babylon, and has left the following,' acronnt of this once renowned city. He says: " it was scjuare: 120 fur- longs every way (i. e., fifteen miles 8(itiare) ; and the whole circuit of it was 4S() furlonj^s (/. c, sixty iiiik>s). The walls were built with lari^e bricks, cenR'nted with bitumen ; and were eighty-seven feet thick, and .*M() feet hiijh. The city was encompa8.sed with a vast ditch, which was tilled with water; and the brick work was carried up on boih sides. The tiarth, which was dug out, was used n[) in niakin;^' tin; bricks for the walls of the city ; so that one may form some idea of the depth and width of the ditch bv the extreme heii^ht and thickness of the walls. There were 100 gates to the city — twenty-tivo on each of the four sides ; these gates with their posts were of brass. There were between every two gates three towers raised ten feet above the walls. A street answered to each gate, so that there were fifty streets in all cutting one another in right angles, each tifteen miles long and l.")l feet wiile. There were lour other streets, with houses only on one side, the ramparts being (m the other side: these made tiie whole compass of the city, and were 200 feet wide. As the stieets of Babylon crossed one another at ri^dit angles, they formed 67G S(juares, (>ach scpiare four furlongs and a half on every side; making two miles and a quarter in circuit, fho biuld- ings of these s(piares were three or four .stories high ; their fronts were highly end)ellisht;d. The EupJirates divided the city into two parts. A bridge of beautiful structure spanned the river. At the east of the bridge stood the oltl j)alaco, and the temple of Bolus, which stood near by, occupied an entire square. At the west end of the bridge was situated the new palace with its hanging gardens, which ranked among the wondei-s of the world. The new palace, which Avas Ituilt l)y Nebuchadnezzar, was a stupendfjus structure and most elabor- ately embellished. Its outer wall embraced six miles; and within that circumference were two other endiatthul walls, besides a high tower. Three brazen gates led into the grand ai-ea. The palace itself was adorned with statuary, with vessels of gold and silver, and other nund)erless curiosities, which he had brought as spoils from Palestine, Tyre, and I'jgypt. The wonderful hanging gardens, however, surjtassed by lar all other structures which this grand monarcli erected, both in costliness and design. It is said tlui t ISebuchadnezzar had the.se gardens erected to ])lease his queen Amytis, daughter of Astyages, who, having been brought up in Media, was very fond of mountains and forests, with which her native country aboun- ded. As Babylon was, however, situated in a great plain, it zx. INTRODUCTION. was no easy matter to gratify her taste and desire in respect to mountainous scenery. But the haughty young king, who had already won ho many victories was evidently determined not to be baffled in his design, but determined to supply by artificial means what nature had denied. He accordingly had a moun- tain reared, with terrace above terrace ; the platform of the highest terrace being equal in height to the walls, namely, 330 feet. The ascent from one terrace to another was by stairs ten feet wide. The platform of each terrace was constructed in the following manner : the top of the piers was first laid over with flat stones sixteen feet in length and about four feet in width ; on the stones were spread layers of matting, then a thick layer of bitumen; then came two courses of bricks, which were covered with solid sheets of lead to prevent leakage. The earth was then heaped up on the platform to the required height. In order, however, to provide additional room for the roots of tlie large trees, prodigious hollow piers were constructed, which were tilled with earth. On the highest terrace, there was an aqueduct supplied from the river by a pump, from which the gardens were irrigated. The whole structure was supported by large vaults built one upon another, and strengthened by a wall twenty-two feet thick. Its extent was 400 feet on each side, and its appearance to those who saw it at a distance was like woods overhanging mountains." Considering then the stupendous structures which Nebuchad- nezzar erected, and how greatly he had enlarged and adorned the city, it surely cannot be said, that there was the least incon- sistency in his making use of the expression : "Is not this great Babylon that I have built," &c., but that on the contrary it was perfectly in accordance with the common mode of expression prevailing among the eastern people. Indeed, there are other examples of this kind to be found in Scripture, for when it is said (1 Kings ix. 18) that Solomon " built Tadmor," afterwards by the Greeks called Palmyra (i. e., the city of palms) ; and Rehoboam to have " built Bethlehem " and " Tekoah," 2 Chron- icles ix. 6 ; and Azariah — also called Uzziah — to have built Elath: 2 Kings xiv. 22; it can only mean that they rebuilt or enlarged these cities, for they had existed long before. So much for this frivolous objection. According to the English version the king is represented to have walked " in the palace ;" but according to the original it is " upon the palace," which is according to the common custom of the East, where the roofs of the houses are flat, and the people, as soon as the evening breezes begin to blow, resort to the roofs to enjoy the cool evening air, where they remain until they retire. In Deut. xxii. 8, provision is made to guard against any accident. " When thou buildest a new house, then INTRODUCTION. xxi. thou shalt make a battlement for thy roof, that thou bring not blood upon thine house, if any man fall from thence." It was, no doubt, according to the prevailing custom, thai Nebuchadnezzar was walking in the hanging gardens, probably upon the highest terrace, whence he obtained a most com- prehensive view of the whole city, which he had so magnifi- cently constructed and adorned ; and the great uight lying before him called forth the expression he made use of. We may observe here, that there was actually nothing sinful in the language itself wliich the king employed — for it certainly caimot. be regarded as sinful for a person looking with pleasure upon the successful accomplishment of some ereat undertaking — the sin ratltsr consisted in the spirit in which it was uttered, especially when taken in connection with the king's dream inmiediately preceding. Nebuchadnezzar had a dream, which like all other supernatural dreams, as in the cases of " the butler and the baker" of the king of E},'ypt, (Gen. xl. 5, 6,) and of Pharaoh, (ch. xli. 1-8,) left such an impression on his mind that at once convinced him that it was not merely a mean- ingless dream, but highly significant in its import, so that his spirit was gieatly troubled. Daniel having interpreted the dream which foreboded the dreadful calamity, earnestly entreated the king, " Wherefore, O king, let my counsel be acceptable unto thee, and break off thine iniquities by showing merey to the poor; peradventure it may be a lengthening of thy tranquillity." Now, whatever momentary beneficial effect this wise counsel may have produced upon the king, it is evident it was of but short duration, and that be soon fell again into his wicked way.s. Hence the narrative proceeds, that " at the end of twelve months" the king was walking upon his palace, when he boastfully and haughtily exclaimed : " Is not this great Babylon that I have built by the mi-jht of my power ! " Nebu- chadnezzar evidently belonged to thnt class of men of whom David long before had said, " The wicked, through the pride of his countenance, will not seek after Ooil : God is not in all his thoughts." (Ps. X. 4.) The supernatural waining of a dreadful impending calamity which was vouchsafed him, failed to con- vince him that, as great a monarch as he was, there is still a mightier power that " ruleth in the kingdom of men." He deified himself in his pride ; and saw nothing in his brilliant military exploits, and in his unbounded accumulation of wealth, but his own power. Hence the punishment which plunged him suddenly from the very pinnacle of his glory to the lowest conceivable st^te of degradation. But this very punishment is also seized upon by many critics as additional fuel to feed the flame of criticism they have zxii. INTttODUCTION. II kindled to coiwume the authenticity of the book of Daniel. What 1 they exclitim, a human 'oeing feeding on gPHHS for mjven years, impossible ! Then there is also the inconsistency, that before ho had fully reeovoied his reason, he is represented as praying. And finally, it is ur<;ed «is not a little strange that such an event should not have been related by any one else, or, as Lengcrke, one of the adverse critics ]tuts it, " in no writer is there Huy ullusion to an ev»'nt which must have occasifmed such chunges in the kingdom, anposition is certainly the most plausible: it is just what might jbe expected of a person writing in a foreign tongue. It is, [however, proi)er to state, that there are some peculiarities met [with which certainly favour the former theory. Here we may [instance, the use of the form nillb (leheveh) for the 3rd wrs. fut.j which is neither a Hebrew nor a Chaldee form, [instead of mH'' i^eheveh) he will he. But be that as it may. xl INTRODUCTION. '■' 1 i I t M 11 . 1 l>'i certain it is, t/hat the Biblical Chaldee forms a dialect of itself. Now, if it be true, that the book of Daniel had been written by some Pseudo-Daniel about the end of the reign of Antiochus Epiphanes, namely, about 160 years B.C., that is about four centuries after Daniel, this would bring it near the time when the Chaldee paraphrases were executed, which are written in the Aramaic, spoken at the time of the Christian era by the Hebrews in Palestine. How, then, is the great differ- ence that exi.sts between the Aramaic employed in Daniel, and the Aramaic employed in the Targums to be accounted for, if no great length of time intervened between their compo- sition ? Not one of the advocates of a later origin of the book of Daniel thought it worth his while to afford any explanation of this point, although from its importance in determining the age of the book, it unquestionably claims the first consideration. They have rested satisfied in conjuring up a Pseudo-Daniel, and then making him appear supremely ridiculous, by rertresenting him as having written a book " to excite his suffering country- men, and to strengthen them by predictions of the approaching triumph of the theocracy," (Do Wette, vol. ii., p. 257,) in lan- guage which " his suffering countrymen" did not understand ; for as already stated, there is a marked difference between the Chaldee in Daniel, and the Chaldee spoken 400 years after- wards in the time of Antiochus Epiphanes ; whilst the portion written in Hebrew, namely, chapters i, ii., 1, 2, 3; viil, ix., x., xi., xii., could only be understood by the learned of the people. No, reader, we may rest assured, if the book had been written at as late a period as our critics assign to it, it would have been written in the language of the Chaldee paraphrases, which the "suffering countrymen" of the author would have understood without having it first translated to them. And, furthermore, it would have all been written in one language, and not a portion in Chaldee, and another in Hebrew. Most of my readers are no doubt aware, that during the long Babylonish captivity, the Hebrew gradually became extinct as a spoken language among the captives, who adopted the Chaldee language. This language the returning exiles brought with them into Palestine, and it afterwards remained their com- mon language, so that it became necessary to give an oral explanation of those portions of the Old Testament, which were read in the synagogues, for it was imperative to read the portions selected in the original Hebrew. There is yet another important question to which our adverse critics have never deigned to give a satisfactory answer, namely, if the book of Daniel were written as late as the reign of Antiochus Epiphanes, about 160 B.C., how can they reconAiile, it being already found among the canonical books when the INTRODUCTION. xli. I Canon of the Old Testament was closed, about 4^6 B.C.? This was the universally admitted time of the closing of the Icanon, at the time of Josephus, and we may rest assured, that (such an important event had become well impressed on the jninds of the people Josephus speaks perfectly plain on this point : he observes, " For we have not an innumerable Imultitude of books among us, disagreeing from, and contra- Idictinf' one another (as the Greeks have), but only twenty-two [books, which contain the records of all past times ; which are justly believed to be Divine; and of them, five belong to Moses, rhich contain his laws and the traditions of the origin of bankind till his death. This interval of time was little short )f three thousand years ; but as to the time, from the death of [oses till the reign of Artaxerxes king of Persia, who reigned ifter Xerxes, the prophets, who were after Moses, wrote down rhat was done in their times in thirteen books. The remain- ing four books contain hymns to God, and precepts for the conduct ot human life. It is true, our history had been written since Artaxerxes very particularly, but hath not been esteemed )f tiie like authority as the former by our forefathers, because Inhere hath not been an exact succession of prophets since that inie." And a little further on he says, "during so many ages as ^ave already passed, no one has been so bold as either to add any- ling to them, to take anything from them, or to make any Ihange in them; but it becomes natural to all Jews, immediately rom their very birth, to esteem those books to contain Divine iuctrines, and to persist in them, and, if occasion be, willingly fco die for them." (Josephus against Apion, b. 1, 8). Josephus apparently gives the number of books of the Old Testament as twenty-two as a kind of memoiia technica to lake the number correspond with the twenty-two letters of le Hebrew alphabet. His classification of the books are as )llows: o books of Moses; 4 books of hymns and ethics, Namely, The f^sahns, Proverbs, Ecclesiastes, and Canticles. His [hirteen prophetical books are: 1. Joshua; 2. Judges and Ruth ; Samuel i., ii.; 4. Kings i, ii. ; 5. Job; 6. Isaiah ; 7. Jeremiah Ind Lamentations ; (S. Ezekiel ; 9. The twelve minor prophets ; [O. Daniel; 11. Ezra i., ii. (i. e., Ezra, Nehemiah); 12. Chronicles ii. ; 13. Esther. Most probably this was the customary mode [f arranging the books at his time ; it is, however, generally Idmitted that in the twenty-two books he included all the joks of the Old Testament, and no others. A similar mode of numbering the books seems to have been [dopted by St. Jerome in Prolog, galeato, 0pp. ix. 454. He lys : " The booKs of the Old Law are in like manner twenty- mo— Moses, 5 ; the Prophets, 8 ; the Hagiography, 9." Josephus placed the closing of the Canon in the reign of xlii. INTRODUCTION. jSh Artaxerxes, and this was precisely the time when the prophet Nehemiah carried on his great work of reform among his nation. (Neh. xiii.) About 450 B.C. Nehemiah obtained leave from Artaxerxes to visit Jerusalem, and to rebuild its walls and gates. He then set assiduously to work to reform abuses among the people, and to renew the covenant of Israel with the Lord. About 43V B.C., according to promise, he returned to Artaxerxes, but two years afterwards he le-visited Jerusalem again, where he remained urjtil his death, which took place about 420 B.C., that is, 260 years before the death of Antiochus Epiphanes, who died in Persia about 160 B.C. It was during this last visit that the final closing of the Canon is generally believed" to have been consummated. It has ever been the established belief of the Jewish church that the Canon of the Scriptures was closed during the time of Ezra and Nehemiah, and that all books now contained in the Hebrew Scriptures were included in the Canon. Hence any- one doubting the genuineness of any book would have been ■declared a heretic. In the prologue to the book of Ecclesiasticus, which is the eldest of the Apocryphal books (about 180 B.C.), Sirach speaks distinctly of the Canonical books in their three divisions. He says : " My grandfather Jesus, when he had much given him- self to the reading of the law, and the prophets, and other books of our fathers, and had gotten therein good judgment." It is further supposed, and that not without good grounds, that Sirach, in the description of the wise man in ch. xxxix. 4-11, took Daniel himself for his model. , It is positively asserted in the Talmud, and admitted even ; by the Karaits, a sect strenuously opposed to all traditions,' that Ezra, after the return from the Babylonish captivity, instituted a synod called flblltin tlD33 [Keneseth haggedolah), the great synagogue, consisting of 120 members, whose duty it \ was to remodel the national and religious institutions of the \ Jews, and to enforce the religious observances. This great; assembly was afterwards supplanted by the Sanhedrim, con- sisting of seventy -one members. The sole condition entitling! a person to become a member of either assembly was, eminence j in learning. Now, although the learned among the ancient | Jews devoted much time to various branches of learning, the! study of Scripture unquestionably received by far the greatest •attention; how then was it possible *'or a spurious writing to find its way among the Canonical books uimoticed by the members of either of these great assemblies ? It is simply out of the question. But there is yet another matter which we must refer toj before dismissing the subject. INTBODUCTION. the prophet a among his btained leave its walls and eform abuses srael with the 3 returned to bed Jerusalem h took place I of Antiochus It was during n is generally Jewish church ig the time of ntained in the . Hence any- uld have been which is the Sirach speaks divisions. He ch given him- nd other books (gment." It is i grounds, that 1 XXX ix. 4-11, admitted even I all traditions, lish captivity, h haijgedolah), whose duty it tutions of the This great ^ mhedrim, con- ition entitling p was, eminence ; the ancient i learning, the! ,r tlie greatest us writing to •ticed by the is simply out must refer to The celebrated Jewish critics, generally called MaaoHtea, who idertook the laborious revision of the Biblical text at the jeginning of the sixth centuiy, evidently regarded the book of )aniel as sacred as the other books of the Old Testament ; for they adopted there the same practice as with the others by jufl'ering an erroneously written word, caused through the care- lessness of the transcribers, to remain undisturbed in the text, md placed the emendation of it in the margin. They regarded khe text as too sacred to be interfered with, even to the extent )f altering the faulty orthography of a word. It is, therefore, ipossible to conceive how a spurious book could have found bs way into the Hebrew Scriptures among a people displaying xch a high degi*ee of veneration f jr the sacred text. In fact, the authenticity of the book of Daniel has never been luestioned by any <>f the ancient writers, whether Jews or Christians. It was in the middle of the third century that a philosopher named Malchus (the Greek form of the Semitic rord melech — a king), but better known in histoiy by the ime Porphyrins (i. e., one clothed in purple), first wrote jaint its authenticity. He was born at Batanea, in Syria, and Ividently was a heathen, although Socrates, the historian, and it. Augustine, declare he was an apostate from Christianity, le wrote fifteen books against the Christians, the twelfth of ^hich was directed against the genuineness of the book of laniel, in which he strives to prove that it was not written by im whose name it bears, but by some one in Judaea, about the [me of Antiochus Epiphanes. He also maintains that what- rer was related in the book of things that happened before the le of Antiochus, may be regarded as true history, but that len he attempts to go beyond this his statements are false, ice he could not have known what would take place in the Iture. St. Jerome, Eusebius, and Apollinaris replied in refuta- )n of his arguments. (See Jerome Frooem. ad Oomm. in Dan.) iPorphery was the only one among all th^? ancient writers who iised his voice against the authenticity of the book of Daniel; id from his time to the middle of the seventeenth century its muineness was not for a moment doubted by a single writer long the hundreds of eminent Biblical critics that flourished [uring this long interval. Among modern writers, Spinoza (bom 1 632) was the first who tpressed a doubt upon this point. He conjectured that a later Writer had taken the first seven chapters from the Chaldee mals ; and from the hint thrown out by this writer, who had ibibed his heretical notions from the writings of the Greek lilosophers, the controversy respecting the book of Daniel Ssumed gradually greater and greater dimensions, until at last culminated in the rejection of the entire book as a mere )urious production, by many critics of this century. xliv. INTRODUCTION. As some of my readers may probably think that I attach too much importance to the adverse criticisms appearing in the writings of modern commentators, I will here give an extract of a sermon lately preached in the city of New York,, which will show that these adverse criticisms are not confined merely to books, but that they have likewise entered the pulpit, and from thence found a place in widely circulated newspapers, and thus circulated through the length and breadth of this continent. The extract is taken from the Chicago Tribune of the 14th instant, and was copied from the New York Times of the 8th instant, where it had been reported. The article is headed in large type, " How to study the Bible — some allegations about the i?ooks of Deuteronomy and Daniel, which will astonish the ordinary Bible Student." It then goes on to say : — " The Rev. R, Heber Newton continued his series of sermons on the wrong and right uses of the Bible at the Anthon Memorial Church (Episcopal) yesterday before a congregation which filled every seat in the Church, and which listened attentively to the words of the preacher. Mr. Newton referred to the Book of Deuteronomy as an instance of the truth of his statement. " This book," he said, " has proved the key to the Old Testament criticism, as the book of the Acts of the Apostles has done to the New Testament criticism. At the time when Deuteronomy was written, according to the story, a copy of the law of Moses, which had long been lost, was found. It was presented to the young king of Israel, who read it with amazement, saw^ the extent to which his people had fallen away from God, and at once took the lead in a great reformation, which lifted the Jews out of the mire of heathenism. The next view presented by thu researches of criticism leads us to believe that the book found I was the Book of Deuteronomy ; that the prophets of the day, despairing of arousing the people from their lethargy in any other way, prepared this book, and presented it to the king as the long-I at law of Moses. In these days it would be called a literary forgery, but the time was then ripe for action, and wha<^ was wanted was not so much strict literary honesty as an awakeninijf of the people to the fact that they had departed from their God. In Deuteronomj' the prophets actually carried J out the genius of the Mosaic laws, and they gave to Israel book full of spiritual life. Studied in the light of these facts! revealed by criticism, Deuteronomy has for the world a new! meaning, and it is in this light that it should be studied! The book of Daniel, too, as read by the old Jews, dated back! to the time of the exile, and was written by the prophet whose I name it bears ; but our critics have learned that the true time! of its appearance was about 150 B. C. That was a time of I INTRODUCrriON. zly. here give an of New York, e not confined se entered the dely circulated th and breadth n the Chicago from the New been reported, tudy the Bible jteronomy and ■} Student." It wton continued 3es of the Bible ;^esterday before lie Church, and preacher. Mr. ' as an instance " he said, "has , as the book ot New Testament y was written, OSes, which had the young king ■ the extent to id at once took i)he Jews out of [resented by the Ithe book found jets of the day, lethargy in any t to the king as [would be called for action, and jrary honesty asj ey had departed j actually carried j 'ave to Israel a I 't of these facts je world a new »uld be studied. jws, dated backi |e prophet whose ,t the true time! was a time ofj ieep depression for the Jews. The Assyrian king had almost lestroyed them as a people, and they needed much to give Ithem hope and sustain them. The seventy years had long )a8sed, at the end of which a promised redemption was to come, and they had lost faith in the old world. It entered the naind of some genius then to read the seventy years as Sabbatical years, making the time for the restoration 490 rears, which would leave only a few years to elapse before the restoration would come. He wrote the story of Daniel, put ito the mouth of the prophet predictions of events which had 3curred 200 years before, and made him declare that after 490 ^ears the Messiah would appear. The book aroused the faith, id staid the souls of the people, and enabled them to hope, id not die, until at length the Man came under whose easy ^oke the entire world was to be subjugated. This is le brief history of the Book of Daniel, and the book lould be studied in the light of this history, or not at all. ?he books, which are of a composite character, should be Bsolved into their separate parts, which should be traced to leir several sources, as in the case of Isaiah, the first thirty- ^ne chapters of which were written by a different author and > a different period than the rest of the work. All these writ- ^gs should be studied until the successive hands working them rer can be traced or detected. None of the books appear now they were originally written. All have been edited and -edited, some of them several times. They offer a form of kveral successive layers, all of which must be laid upon before [clearer and intelligble account can be rendered of them." [I will leave it to the intelligent reader to form his own idea to what effect such utterances must produce, coming from a irgyman of a prominent Church, which represent the Old stnment, containing a number of spurious hooks, and that kone appear now as they weie originally written." And I )eal to every lover of the Bible to say, whether it is not jh time that some action be taken, to counteract this fear- i, Bible-destroying teaching. It has done its fearful work in irope. Only a short time ago, it was stated in one of the il papers of this city, that out of the one million and a half labitants of Berlin, only thirty-five thousand attend reli- )us services. The late Dr. Norman McLeod, in one of his >t letters from Germany, stated, that out of one hundred )ple, ninety are unbelievers. I trust these statements are iggerated, certain it is that the religious state in many parts Europe is in a most deplorable condition. Happily, however, the number of adverse critics is utterly Significant as compared with the host of eminent writers who re maintained the genuineness of the book of Daniel ; and xlvi. INTRODUCTION. I! ' I'ill^li from the remarks I have offered, the reader will perceive how ] easily all objections may be refuted. From the few examples given in the preceding pages, the] reader may now form some slight idea of the manner in which the Scriptures are assailed from the beginning to the very end; and when he takes into consideration that the assailants are,j for the most part, men of the highest standing and profoundest I learning, he will cease to wonder that so many have had their I faith in the Bible shaken. It is unquestionably true that thej Bible is preeminently a book of faith, for in it are recorded occurrences which can only be believed as true when viewed]^ with the eye of faith. Such are all miracles and prophetic I declarations; and to deny that such were absolutely necessaryf in establishing a religious system, would simply be the heightj of folly. Still, however great a man's faith may be, it will[ succumb when expected to believe a thing which is clearly con- trary to common sense. For example : a person may unhesitai tingly accept the account of the miraculous confusion ofi languages at the building of the tower of Babylon, or of thei destruction of the wicked cities of Sodom and Gomorrha, or off the conversion of Lot's wife into a pillar of salt, or of changing! the staff of Moses into a serpent, and again changing it into nl staff. All these, and such other miracles, he would argue weiel performed by direct Divine agency, to serve a Divine purpose! and it would, therefore, not only be vain, but impious, for a| finite being to attempt to fathom such mysteries, which werf| designedly removed beyond the bound of scientific investiga tion. But not so when he is brought face to face with sucl! and similar questions as those given in the preceding pages! in the consideration of which he is permitted to exercise th| common sense with which an All-Wise Creator has endowed hii Here he would at once argue, if the Bible makes certain stat ments which by actual facts are proved to be incorrect, ii| cannot claim to be an inspired book. Happily, there are many whose faith in the authenticity o the Bible is so firmly rooted that the most plausible argument^ aided by all the prestige which learning and fame can imparl| fail to make the least impression on them, and who refuse ti| bow the knee to the idol which modern criticism endeavours to set up, dazzling as it may appear. On the other hand, then are, alas, only too many who hail these criticisms with joy, i the harbingers of a time of freedom when all restraints whicl the Scriptures impose will be removed, and freedom of thoughj will have full sway! The whispering of conscience, that maj still suggest a doubt in the new theories, is completely silence by the reflection that so many learned and acute men coulj not possibly be astray in their deductions, and that it would ' INTRODUCTION. xlvii. ing pages, the inner in which | ) the very end ; j assailants are, nd profoundestj have had their ' true that the| it are recorded le when viewed |^ and prophetic I utely necessary r be the height! may be, it willj h is clearly con- 1 may unhesita-' IS confusion of! ylon, or of the! Gomorrha, or off ;, or of changing! ,nging it into 4 ould argue wevei Divine purpose] b impious, foraf ries, which werel mtific investiga-i face with sucl| [preceding pages,| 1 to exercise th^ as endowed hii es certain statef be incorrect, \i folly for the unlettered to doubt where the wise speak so positively. Novelty, too, frequently lends a particular charm, to whose fasckiation the weak-minded and thoughtless often yield ; but there is no agency which wields such a powerful influence as the good name and fame of an author. Works emanating from I such writers are generally sought after and carry weight, whilst those of less known authors, though perhaps possessed [of higher scholarship, will only make their way to public favour Islowly, or may even fail to enlist any notice whatever. The [rentief will hardly have forgotten the universal sensation caused [by the appearance of the " Essays and Reviews," the combined work of eminent P]nglish Churchmen and scholars, and by the [yet more famous publication of Bishop Colenso's work on " The rPentateuch and Book of Joshua," and only very recently by Professor Smith's article on "The Bible," in the*"New Ency- Iclopcedia Britannica," in which he advocates that the Mosaic [authorship of the book of Deuteronomy can hardly be sustained, land thinks it must have been written at a much later date. But there is yet another cause to which the evil eff'ects pro- luced by the dissemination of rationalistic literature may be iscribed, and that is, the attractive titles of the works with rhich they are put before the public. To a work of this kind ly attention was lately called in this city. It evidently was )ut forward by its authors as a popular work, suitable for old md young, and hence called "The Bible for Learners." It is a iTork of three neat volumes, writter in a very pleasing, winning style, and, in addition, claims the joint authorship of three aminent men, namely, a professor of Oriental Literature, a pro- fessor of Theology, and a well known preacher of Holland, irom the title-page one would hardly expect to find such poison is lurks in the pages of the work. In it the miracles are luietly set aside, and altogether it is as rationalistic in it& jndency as could possibly be conceived. It is to counteract the effects of modern criticism, as we have jefore stated, that this publication is put before the public, ill the difficulties which we have referred to will be fully explained hereafter. It would have taken too much space to liscu-ss them in a satisfactory manner in the " Introduction." '^e have, however, deemed it best to give at least a few explanations as an example, in order to show to the reader how these alleged "exaggerations and discrepancies" may, after all, be satisfactorily explained. But the careful reader of Scripture will yet meet with other lifficulties, arising altogether from other sources, than the diffi- culties which modem criticism has conjured up. There are, in the first place, difficulties caused by mistranslation, whereby xlviii. INTRODUCTION. li many passages are either altogether rendered incomprehensible, or are made to convey quite a different meaning from that intended by the sacred writers. These mistranslations being so numerous, and not unfrequently of such a serious nature, that for many years a new version has been earnestly called for both by bishops, clergymen, and eminent laymen. It is felt, and justly so, that Hebrew philology, like all other sciences, has made such wonderful advancement since the English version has been executed that most, if, indeed, not all, the existing mistranslations may be rectified. To what extent this much desired object will be realized by the new version now in process of being made, requires yet to be seen. No doubt, however, much good will be eftected by it. Secondlv, -bhere are diflSculties which arise sometimes in the proper underjitanding of many passages causea by the numerous idioms of th> Hebrew language, or from peculiar modes of expression employed by oriental nations, or from references to customs and manners which frequently widely differ from ours. No new version, no matter how carefully executed, can possibly obviate the difficulties arising from these sources. The acute German writer, Wolfgang Menzel, has therefore very perti- nently remarked that "a translation can never be entirely faithful : to be so in one respect it must deviate in others." (Menzel's German Literature, vol. i., p. Go) The truth of this assertion is but too apparent in every translation ; for, even in the best, where the masterly hand of the translator has exercised its utmost ingenuity, and where even the richness of ths lan- guage has bountifully contributed to insure success, the reader will, nevertheless, have to lament the absence of that inde- finable something, which has its existence only in its native language, and constitutes the whole life of the original. Yet all that may be said regarding the ordinarj'^ difficulties of translating falls far short of those enumerated in rendering the inspired writings of the Old Testament into a language of a totally foreign clime. For the Hebrew, as has been aptly said, " is the language of man in his infancy, ere his reasoning powers have supplanted his feelings: simple in structure, child- like, truthful in expression — the very language of the heart in the household affections, in the ardour of faith, or the abyss of despair ; or, if dignified, sublime in simple majesty, recalling, in the commonest metaphors, the tent, the desert, the pastoral life of the patriarchal ages : and can we translate such a lan- guage as this into that of times and people who have grown grey in philosophy and the world, and who are artificial, or callous, in those feelings which the Hebrew expressed with the honest fervour of youth ? No ; the Hebrew muse, as aforetime, hangs her harp on the willows, and refuses to sing her native INTRODITCTION. xlix. songs in a strange land." (Mr. J. Nicholson, in his preface to Ewald's Hebrew Grammar.) There are, no doubt, many devoted B'ble readers who, per- haps, have not even noticed any of the very many existing difficulties arising from the different caui^es to which we have just referred, or it by chance their attention at any time has been attracted by a passage not (piite clear, or altogether incomprehensible, they yet passed it by without pajy^ing any special attention to it. Not, indeed, because they leel indif- ferent iibout such matters, but simyly taking it for granted that being Bible statements, they must of necessity be correct. All men are, however, not constituted alike, and, therefore, cannot be expected to be of one and the same frame of mind. Hence we tind many good and piously disposed men who delight in reading the Scriptures, have 3'et, at times, their mirjds seriously disturbed by these perplexities. That such is the case I know from actual facts; for I am constantly appealed to for explanations of passages of Scripture. Tn order that the reader may form a just and adequate idea of the urgent necessity of having these mistranslations rectified either by a new translation or by explanatory notes, we will adduce a few examples here. In turning to the English version our attention is already arrested at the 2nd verse of the 1st chapter of Genesis, by the phiase — " And the earth was with- out form and void." Now it is quite probable that the ordinary reader may fail to discover any difficulty lurking in the passage, and yet when we come to examine it more closely, we find it contains a .statement which is altogether incomprehensible, since it is impossible to conceive how anything material can possibly subsist " without form." Some of the readers will probably remember the pertinent I lines of Dean Swift, he says : — " Matter, as wise logicians say, Cannot without form subsist. And form, say I, as well as they, Must fail, if matter brings no grist. " The translators have no doubt used the expression " with- out form," to convey the idea that the earth was a shapeless mass; but the original neither admits of such a rendering, nor does it afford the meaning which Moses wishes to convey, which is, rather, that the earth was at that time desolate and empty, that none of those organized beings existed upon it, before they were afterwards called into being or made by the Creator. The Hebrew words ^niST intl {tft-ohu luavohu) literally signify desolateness and emptiness, i. e., desolate and empty, as abstract nouns are often employed instead of adjec- 7 1. INTRODUCTION. tives ; but nowhere in the Bible, or in any other Hebrew work is any one the two Hebrew words ever used in the sense " with- out form." It is, indeed, quite inexplicable why the translators should have givftn this strange rendering, for they cannot even be said to have followed any other versioti, since the English version followed by the French " sans forvie et vide" are the only two versions in whicFtKaTrendering is found. We may rxixt refer the reader to chapter iii. 7, where we "And the eyes of thein both were opened, and they knew .v they were naked ; and they sewed fig leaves together, and made themselves aprons." in this passage there are two terms employed, "sewed' and "aprons," which have been eagerly laid hold of by some modern writers, who have sneeringly asked "where our first parents obtained needles, and how could they have known anything about 'aprons,' which is quite a modern term?" But here again the fa»ilt does not lie with the Bible, but with the translation, for the passage should have been rendered, "and they adjusted, or plaited, fig leaves and made themselves §irdles." So it is rendered in the German version : " sie ochten " — /. c, they plaited. The rendering in the English version of Job xvi. 15, "I have sewed sackcloth upon my skin," is still more unhappy, as it involves an impossibilitj' : but here again it should have been rendered, "I have adjusted sacV ,h upon my skin," such as was used for mourning. The pi ■ meaning of the Hebrew verb igfi (taphar) was, no douo^, .o twist, to plait, or to adjust; but, after the introduction of needles, the verb became also to be used in the sense to sew. As for the Hebrew word tn"l!in {chagoroth), rendered in the English version " aprons," according to its etymology it simply signifies girdles, witliout any reference to shape or form, being derived from the verb -|;in {ckagar) to hind round, to gird. The fig leaves here spoken of were possibly those of the_^cw8 indicus, well adapted for this purpose, being large and broad. "So couusell'd he, and both together went Into the thickest wood ; there soon they chose The fig tree ; not that Icind for fruit renown'd, But such as at this day, to Indians known, In Malabar or Decan spreads her arm." Parculise Lost, book ix. In chapter iv. 1.6, we read: " And the Lord set a mark upon Cain, lest any finding him should kill him." This rendering of the English version has given rise to the wildest conjectures. It generally has been understood to mean that God placed some kind of mark upon Cain, which was to serve as a kind of pro- tection against harm from those who might seek to take vengeance upon him. Indeed, so strongly has this idea taken hold of the English mind, that it has become quite proverbial INTRODUCTION. u. to say, " he hears the mark of Cain." Some writers have even f'ono so far as to suggest that it must have been one of the etters rnH"^ (Jehovah) that was placed on the brow of Cain. But the absurdity of the notion of an}' mark having been placed upon Cnin will at once become apparent when we take into consideration that the meaning of such a mark could not possibly have been known to those who met him; nay, more, it might even have acted against him. The whole difficulty is, however, removed, and the meaning of the passage becomes beautifully clear if w render it, "And the Loud gave, or put, a sign to Cain," that is, God gave Cain a miraculous attestation to convince him that the promise just made to him that "who- soever slayeth Cain, vengeance shall be taken on him seven- fold," would be literally fulfilled. And what could possibly' inspire him with greater confidence tlian a niiraculous atti'sta- tion? It at once afforded to Cain a visible demonstration of the power of God, and thus convinced him that Ho w^ho is capable of performing such a wonder, is likewise capable to protect and to punish. Wo find other instances recorded in Scripture where miracles were vouchsafed as assurances of the certain fulfilment of Divine promises. In this manner Mo8(;s was assured that his mission into Egypt would bo successful, by his rod being changed into a serpent, and again the serpent into a rod : and by his hand becoming leprous as snow, and again restored to its natural flesh. Exod. iv. 1-7.) So Hezekiah received a miraculous attc ition that he would recover from his sickness, and that he wouM be delivered from the king of Assyria: "And this shall he as a sign unto thee from the Lord that the Loud will do this thing that he hath spoken: Behold, I will bring again the shadow of the degrees which is gone down in the sun-dial of Ahaz, ten degrees backward. So the .sun returned ten degrees, by which degrees it was y^ :" down." (Is. xxxviii. 7, 8.) In this passage the Hebrew word for sign Jt^jj^ (oth) is precisely the same as that employed in Genesis iv. 15. We may next refer the reader to chapter vii. 16, " And they that went in, went in male and female of all flesh, as God had commanded him ; and the Lord shut him in." Here the opponents of Scripture ask, where was the necessity for a direct Divine intervention in so .simple an act as merely closing the door after all had entered the ark ? And the objection certainly obtains even additional force, when it is taken into consider- ation, that suoh Divine intervention throughout the Scriptures was only emplo^'ed when any special object was to be obtained which could not be aflected by natural means. But here again a closer adherence to the original will at once remove the cause of objection, by translating " and the Lord shut about him." iii It! \:' ht ! A similar rendering is given in the Targum of Onkelos (the Chaldee version) " and the LoKD protected over or about him," which even brings out the meaning of the passage more clearly. The preposition 'iJlj (haad) rendered in the English version by '• in " indicates in its primary use enclosure, around or about, an object. A most striking example of this force of the pre- position is furnished in Job i. 10, where Satan asked, "Hast not thou hedged round about him, and about his house, and about all that he hath on every side ?" The meaning of the passage in question evidently is, that after all had entered the ark, its occupants became the special objects of Divine protection. Let the reader imagine to himself a vessel containing no less than 3,600,000 cubic feet, built at a time when nautical architecture was entirely unknown, built too, as the demensions given in Scripture would indicate, not so much for navigation, as for carrying capacity, this structure, heavily laden as it must have been, tossed on the merciless wivters of the flood, and he may form a just idea of the need of protection from Him who alone can assuage the raging waves and bid the winds to be still. But there was yet another danger to which the ark was exposed, and that was the assault of the drowning multitude, who, though they may have sneered at the warning of the impending danger which the building of the ark afforded, and neglected to profit by the many years of grace which its building must necessarily have occupied, would now, when they saw the waters rapidly increasing, naturally make a rush for the oi\ly object that could afford them safety: so that here, again, Divine protection alone could be of any avail. In chapter ix. 1 3, we read, " I do set my bow in the cloud, and it shall be for a token of a convenant between me and the earth." Now the rendering, "I do set my bow," clearly conveys the idea that the rainbow had never existed before, whilst when we take into consideration that it is merely formed by the refraction and reflection of the sun's rays in the drops of falling rain, it would be impossible to account for its non-existence during the 1G56 years that elapsed between the creation and the deluge, it would indeed require a great stretch of the imagination to suppose that it had not been frequently seen during that long period. But here again the apparent incon- sistency will at once disappear, if we render the passage, " I do constitute my bow " instead of " I do set my bow." The passage rendered in this way does not only now become intelligible but also strikingly beautiful. The rainbow, which no doubt often had enchanted its beholders, has now obtained a peculiar signi- ficance— it was henceforth to be a visible sign of a covenant between the eternal Jehovah and the frail inhabitants of the earth. No wonder that many nations have looked with special INTRODUCTION. liii. reverence upon the rainbow, and have connected religious, ideas with its appearance, and that tiie ancient Greeks, appa- rently in reference to its emblematical significance, should have called it Iris, i. e., the messenger of the gods. Even some of the inhabitants of South America worshipped the rainbow as a benign goddess. The verb "ifiJ (nathan) has, in common with most Hebrew vei'bs, several shades of signification, namely, to give, to set, to constitute, to make, &c. The rendering of the English version is, therefore, not actually a mistranslation of the Hebrew verb, [but rather an unhappy choice from its various meanings. We shall here only refer to two more mistranslations from [the Pentateuch, which, by some opponents of Scripture, have {been eagerly laid hold of as furnishing positive proofs that the Pentateuch can lay no claim to Divine inspiration. 1'ho first passage to which we would draw the reader's attention is Exodus iii. 22, where we read: "But every woman shall borrow [of her neighbour, and of her that sojourneth in her house, I jewels of silver, and jewels of gold, and raiment : and ye shall [put them upon your sons, and upon your daughters ; and ye Ishall spoil the Egyptians." And again, xi. 2 : " Speak now in [the ears of the people, and let every man borrow of hi« neigh- Ibour," &c. In obedience to this command, we read, ch. xxii. [35, 3G : "And the children of Israel did according to the word [of Moses ; and they borrowed of the Egyptians jewels of silver, [and jewels of gold, and raiment: and the Lord gave the people [favour in the sight of the Egyptians, so that they lent unto [them : and they spoiled the Egyptians." Now it is urged by many writers tliat the command to boi'i'ow [from the Egyptians what was never intended to be restored is [not only an act of injustice, but it even favours theft, and is listinctly set forth by the Psalmist as a characteristic mark of the wicked : " The wicked borroweth and payeth not again." [(Ps. xxxvii. 21.) Some commentators have met tliis olrjection yj affirming that God, who is supreme Lord of all things, may [transfer, as He in His infinite wisdom thinks best, when and in {what manner He pleases, the rights of men from one to another.. I Thus kingdoms are set up and cast down, monarehs are wholly {or partially deprived of their possessions to render others more {powerful, and these again, in their turn, are subjected to similar vicissitudes. Will it be said that these are mere occurrences of {chance ? Certainly not. They are commanded by Him who hath said, "Surely as I have thought, so it shall come to pass; {and as I have purposed, so it shall stand." (Is. xiv. 24.) But this view of the transaction in question, although it {incontrovertibly proves that there was nothing derogatory to Divine justice in transferring the wealth of the Egyptians to. ft Uv. INTRODUCTION. ' \l: n* iJii m the oppressed Israelites, still leaves the objection to be answered as to the viode by which, according to the English version., it was effected. It is upon this point, after all, that the opponents of Scripture chiefly dwell. The objection, therefore, must be met upon purely philological ground, and this we think may be done in a most conclusive manner. The Hebrew verb ^jj^tD (shadl) which, in the passages in question, is rendered by borrow, primarily means to ask, to demand, and it is only in a very few instances in the whole Bible employed in the accessory meaning to horrow. In the sense to ask or demand the verb constantly occurs. As for example : 1 Kings iii. 5, " In Gideon the Lord appeared to Solomon in a dream by night ; and God said bss^lD (sheal) ask," or dem.and, " what I shall give thee." So in 2 Kings ii. 7 : "And it came to pass, when they were gone over, that Elijah said unto Elisha ^j^tD (s/ut of the whole country, and not to allow them to remain one lay, or rather one single hour, looking upon every moment they abode among them as an irremediable calamity ," and Further on, in speaking of the people C(^llecting their " booty," le says : " not in order to gratify any love of money, or, as any isurer might say, because they coveted their neighbours' goods; (ixGW should they do so ?) but, first of all, because they were thus receiving the necessary wages from those whom they had perved so long a time ; and, secondly, because they had a right afflict those at whose hands they had suffered wrong with ifflictions slighter than, and by no means equal to, what they jad endured: for how can the deprivation of money and treasures be equivalent to the loss of liberty ? on behalf of rhich those who are in possession of their senses dare not only cast away all their property, but even to venture their lives." In the celebrated Jewish work, the lalviud, there is a story related, and though we cai.not vouch for its truth, we may yet Subjoin it, as it tends to prove that the Hebrews themselves lever for a moment supposed that their forefathers had merely j>orrowed the tieasures from the Egyptians : — " When Alexander the Great was in Egypt, an Egyptian prince came to him and said : ' Our nation has always heard lliat you are so benevolent as to pay, or cause to be paid, all the just claims of your poor subjects. I came, therefore, to iquire of you if such be really the case.' The king replied in bhe affirmative, and inquired of the prince the nature of his lemand. The prince then stated that the Jews, who were Imder his jurisdiction, had several hundred years ago Ijorrowed jewels of silver wnd jewels of gold from his people, and not ati ret returned them nor paid for them, and he now came to lemand both principal and interest. Alexaniler wi^^liod to know i^hat evidence he could adduce to substjintiate his (^laim. The jrince replied the Bible. This is indeed excellent evidence baid the king; will you allow me three days to inquire into the lature of your claim ? The prince readily consented to this, ind at the same time referred him to Exodus iii. 22 and xi.f2. Ivi. INTRODUCTION. m evidence. The king then coisulted with his secretary, Gaviah ben Pasea, a leai*ned Jew ^■' to, on the morning of the third day, called upon King Alexander and told him to get the prince when he came to consent, in the first place, that if a balance were due on either side it should be paid with interest; secondly, that the Bible should be evidence for and against both parties ; and further, to inquire of him if their law did not allow servants and slaves a just and equitable compensation for their services — all of which he will no doubt readily admit. Then refer him to the Bible, where he will find that Jacob and his family took all their cattle and all their wealth into Egypt; also state that the Israelites were three or four hundred years in bondage to his nation ; then estimate the value of the pro- perty that Jacob and his family took into Egypt, and the interest of it, and also the services of all the Jewish nation for four hundred years, at so much a day for each one ; then add the interest, and double both principal and interest, for the Egyptians made them also double their labour, and they had also to find their own materials to make brick. Let him from that sum deduct the small amount of jewels, and there will be such a large balance in our favour that their whole nation will not be able to pay it. Besides, he does not understand our language, for the word i^^'O (shadl) means to ask, to demand, as a debt or an equivalent, and not to borroiv. In support of these allegations the learned secretary referred the king to numerous passages of the Bible. The king was well pleased with this critical view of the case, and adopted the plan pointed out, and when the prince came, and Alexander explained the whole merits of the case to him, shewing beyond doubt that his nation was largely in debt to the Israelites, the prince fled into a f reign country." Once more, in Deuteronomy xxix. 2, 3, 4, we read: "And Moses called unto all Israel, and said unto them, Ye have seen all that the Lord did before your eyes in the land of Egypt unto Pharaoh, and unto all his servants, and unto all his land ; the great temptations which thine eyes have seen, the signs, and those great miracles :" — now let the reader mark what follows — "Yet the Loud had not given you an heart to perceive, and eyes to see. and ears to hear, unto this day." It is evident that, according to this reading in the English version, the con- cluding declaration of Moses plainly represents God as the cause of Israel not perceiving the signs and miracles ; and profane writer:? have not failed to bring this passage forward, as one strongly arguing against the purity and holiness of the Deity. From the context, too, it is evident that Moses here reproves the stubborn Israelites for their hardness of heart and callous ness in not perceiving the manifold wonders which had been INTRODUCTION. Ivii. wrought for them. Would not, therefore, the question naturally suggest itself to every thinking mind, why upbraid them for [not seeing, perceiving and hearing, when God himself withheld [from them the means of doing so ? It would, indeed, be alto- gether vain even to attempt to reconcile the fourth verse as rendered in the English version, either with the context or with the Divine attributes of infinite goodness, justice, and holiness :)f God. But the whole difficulty which the passage presents is entirely owing to a mistranslation of the Hebrew word KbT Iv'lo) in the fourth verse, which should have been rendered nterrogatively, hath not ? instead of simply negatively, " yet lath not ?" the sentence would then have read, "hath not the jORD given you a heart to perceive, and eyes to see, and ears to lear to this day ?" Thus rendered, the passage becomes per- feectly clear, and harmonizes in every respect with the context.* I We shall now proceed to give a few examples of such mis- branslations from other books of the Bible, and the first we phall notice is from the book of Job, where, indeed, the mis- ranslations are very numerous. Among the number of questions which God showered down It of a thunderstorm upon Job, illustrative of the omnipotence kf the Almighty in the formation and disposition of the works ff creation, occurs the following one : " Canst thou make him fraid," (i.e., the horse mentioned in the preceding verse,) " as a grasshopper ? " This passage also has not escaped the scrutin- ring eyes of the opponents of Scripture. They have asked : How can we reconcile with common sense the question put to Fob, whether he could make a horse afraid like a grasshopper, Vhen we all know that a child can easily frighten a horse ? Tow can we, therefore, or how can anyone suppose that God rould ask Job if it was possible for him to do what a child rould find no difficulty whatever in doing ? " It will hardly le denied that the objection is a plausible one, for as the Passage is rendered in the English version, it can hardly be reconciled "with common sense;" but had the objectors taken Ihe trouble, as they ought to have done, to examine the original, [hey would have found that the apparent inconsistency is The Hebrew negative particle Ij^^ (to), Le., not, either with or without the injunction, is frequently employed interrogatively for {J^^n (h&lo), ».e., u not, trhen the question is a negative one, for brevity's sake the Hebrew interrogative larlc (n) {ha) seems thus to be often omitted. Those who can refer to the lebrew Bible will tind similar examples — Jonah iv. 11, .Tob ii. 10, and xiv. 16, liamentations i. 12, and iii. 36, and in other places. The translators appear lot to have been ignorant of this peculiar use of the Hebrew negative particle, « they have rendered it interrogatively in the above quoted examp^s ; but rhy they should have overlooked it in the passage in question is impowible to lay. 8 Iviii. INTBODUCTION. ^U^o^:^^' //T-«^ >-vtX». 'sr- T'Av ^V-ru ^-^i " Yon then, whowe judgment the right course would steer, Know well each ancient's proper character ; His fable, subject, scope in every page ; Religion, country, genius of hia age : Without all these at once before your eyes, Cavil you may, but never criticise. " Eisay on CriticUm, lines 118-123. Or, in other words, he who would at a proper jud;;ment arrive, can only hope of doing so, by making himself first; acquainted with every thing bearing upon the subject. If, in other professions, the utmost care is generally exercised ^ in dealing with difficult subjects, it is not eiisily comprehended j why the interpreter of Scripture should deal in such an off- hand manner with the most important Biblical subjects. The! physician in dealing with a disease makes first a careful diag- j nosis of the case, so that he may arrive at the proper con- clusion as to its cause, and thereby ascertain the nature of the! malady, in order that he mny shape his treatment accordingly, The judge, in deciding upon a caie, searches for the funda- mental principles of right or wrong that underlie the cnse, and is guided by them in his decision. But mnny of our modern! writers and lecturers, lay hold of difficult passages of Scrip- tures, force their own constructions upon them, and send them I into the world as witnesses against the inspirations of the sacred Scriptures, and call it Biblical criticism. What, I would ask, would be thought of a surgeon who would amputate a limb with- out first carefully inquiring whether there was no possibility ofl saving it ? He would be stigmatized as a qnack, and justly su.j And does the interpreter or lecturer stand in a diffijrent posi-l tion who deliberately mutilates a passage of Scripture ? There! is, however, a wide difference in the result of the two actions The surgeon, by his unskilfulness, inflicts a serious loss uponl one person only, but who can tell the unspeakable evil cffectsi that even one careless interpretation of an important passage] of Scripture may not be productive of ? The author of " Essay on the Pursuit of Truth," &c., speaking! of the duty of a thorough examination of a subject before fonnr ing an opinion, says : " Without pretending to a c examinaticm, this duty is incumbent on all who ' b under the following classes : (1 ) " Those whose professed office is to teach ors. (2) " Those who voluntary undertake to inst. ct othn s. (3) "All those who have the means and opportunity o' inquir-l ing into subjects which have a bearing on their moral actions or| conduct in society. " On all persons who come under these three classes, it mayl be stated to be incumbent to pursue their inquiries till they can! clearly trace satisfactory conclusions from undeniable premises."! INTRODUCTION. Ixv. n, lines 118-123. ip. 25, 27,) and in another place he snys : " Whoever fears to [xamino the foundation of his opinion, and enter on the con- [idcration of a counter-argument, may rest uHsimd that he hns pme latent apprehension of the u^iaoundness and incapacity standing investigation." (p. 27.) Wore this duty more strictly attended to, the shrine of infi- lelity would lose many of its votaries. It is undoubtedly true, that in the ranks of the adverse^ ^J ^ ^ ritics of the Bible there are to be found men of profound learn- ' c-* o^-^v^^-^ iff; men too, who, no doubt, hold their opinions from a cou- fientioua conviction that they are based upon sound criticism. When a man like the Rev. Robertson Smith, for example, izards the loss of a high position and its emoluments, and fhat he may probably regard even as a greater loss, the [>ss of intimate friends, we cannot but come to the conclusion lat he sincerely believed his opinions regarding the five books Moses to be well founded. But, whilst on the same hand, I willingly give them credit for sincerely holding and expressing leir views, I am, on the other hand, constrained to denounce most reprehensible the mode adopted by them in order to nder their opinions more acceptable to their readers. Some [ell us that a great portion of the Pentateuch could not have ^.. r-jt'vv- l^ icen written by Moses, whilst others go even .still further, and , '^ >'IwUw v , And upon thy people, and upon the house of thy father, Days tnat have not come. From the day that Ephraim departed from Judah ; Even the King of Assyria." Upon the concluding sentence, " Even the King of Assyria," jQWth observes : " Houbigant supposes these words to have Wl il i Ixviii. INTRODUCTION. been a marginal gloss, brought into the text by mistake ; and 80 likewise Archbishop Seeker. Besides their having no force or eftect here, they do not join well in construction with the words preceding, as may be seen by the strange manner in which the ancients have taken them ; and they very inelegantly foi'estall the mention of the King of Assyria, which comes in | with greater propriety in the twentieth verse. I have there- fore taken the liberty of omitting them in v'^he translation. (See his Commentary on Isaiah vii. 17.) The opinion of these divines was also adopted by manyj German commentators, as Gesenius, Eichorn, Knobel, and! others. Ewald, on the contrary, and with him a host ofj other critics regard the passage as genuine, and I think any- one, giving the subject a careful consideration, will arrive at I the same conclusion. The prophets frequently foretell events first either in figurative language, or in somewhat general terms, and then immediately add an explanatory clause. In the passage before us, Isaiah, having first declared that great days of tribulation should come upon King Ahaz and his people, adds, as an explanatory clause : " Even the King of Assyria," to show by whom the.se days of tribulation were to be brought about. Such an explanatory clause was even necessary here, for in the next verse the Egyptians are alsoj mentioned as enemies who should harass Judea : " And it shall come to pass in that day ; The Lord will whistle to the fly. Which is in the utmost parts of the rivers of Egpyt, And to the bee which is in the land of Assyria."* — (v. 18.) But it was from the Assyrians that Judea was to suffer byj far the greatest afflictions,, and hence are spoken of again inl verse 20, under the figure of a razor. But we may refer the reader also to verse G of this veryj chapter, where he will find precisely a similar explanatory! clause, the genuineness of which has never been que.stioned. • The imagery in this verse is very beautiful and highly appropriate. Thel figure of tohisllinff (o the flu and bee, is taken from the custom of drawing beal from their hives, and leading them back again by whistling. The Greeks and! Romans used bells for that purpose, and a similar practice is sometimeil resorted to with us at the time of swarming. The great armies of Egypt! and Assyria are here spoken of under the figure of swarms of flies and bees.! So Moses compares the Amorites who harassed the Israelites to bees : Deut.f i. 44. And the Psalmist likewise speaks of the many enemies that encora ( passed him to have been like swarms of bees. Homer also compares the! Grecian army on the rivei' Scamander to swarms of flies, and the Arabian poetil frequently make use of similar figures. Egypt, on account of its marshy! places, is infested with flies, whilst the bee was very plentiful in Assyria. Byl "the rivers of Egypt" must be understood the Nile and its canals. The! expression, "The Lord will whistle," indicates also the great control whicbl God has over the enemies of Judea : it requires a mere sound, and they arel ready to do Jehovah's will. INTRODITCTION. Ixix. J mistake ; and laving no force ction with the nge manner in ery inelegantly \ v^hich comes in| I have there- he translation. pted by many] I, Knobel, andj him a host of| id I think any- 1, will arrive at I foretell events lewhat general ory clause. In larcd that great A.ha55 and his Cven the King ribulation were lause was even! ptians are also! I : :pyt. -(V. 18.) vas to suffer by I ten of again in] G of this veryi explanatory! 1 questioned. ar appropriate. The! )m of drawing beesl J. The Greeks andj ctice is sometiniesl lat armies of EgyptI ns of flies and beei.| ites to bees : Deutl nemies that encora I also compares the! d the Arabian poetil ount of its marshyl iful in Assyria. Byl id its canals. I'hel [reat control whictl und, and they artl " Let us go up againat Jadah, and besiege it, And let us subdue it to ourselves : . And we will cause a King to reign in the midst of it ; Even the son of Tobeal. Here the enemies of Judah are represented as meditating the conquest of the country and of setting a foreign King over it. The last clause explains who this King was to be "Even the Son )f Tobeal," of whom nothing whatever is known, and who most )robably was a man of very low birth, an indignity, no doubt, itended to make the Israelites to feel more keenly the power )f their conquerors. In Isaiah Hii. 11, Bishop Lowth renders: "By the know- jdge of him shall my servant justify many^," instead of " my ighteous servant" as it is in the Hebrew. He assigns as a rea- son for omitting the word "righteous," that "Three manuscripts (two of them ancient,) omit the word pi^^ (fsaddik) ; it seems to be only an imperfect repetition, by mistake of the preceding rord. It makes a solecism in this place, for according to th(» constant usage of the Hebrew language, the adjective, in a jhrase of this kind, ought to follow the substantive." The Bishop, no doubt, has given the rule quite correctly, [namely : When the adjective qualifies a noun its proper posi- [tion is after the noun, contrary to our mode of expression, but he jhas for a moment forgotten that there are few rules without [exceptions, and in this case they happen to be very numerous, [for whenever the sacred writers wish to lay particular stress [upon the adjective, in order to draw particular attention to it, [they misplace it from its proper position and put it before the noun. There is, therefore, no ground whatever for regarding the adjective in the passage before us as spurious. On refer- ring to the Hebrew Bible the adjective will be found emphati- cally placed before the noun in the following places : Ps. Ixxxix. 51, Jer. xiv. 16, 1 Chron. xxviii. 5, Jer. iii. 7, 8, 10, fro. No one, 1 1 feel assured, will accuse Bishop Lowth of want of orthodoxy, i but these few examples will show the necessity of great care I'm d(^R\ing with siipjjosed interpolations ; and that in no case should a paspnge or word be rejected until every means has failed of reconciling it with the usage of language, or with the context. These last remarks afford me a fit opportunity of drawing the readers attention to a very difficult passage, one to which the opponents of Scripture have jubilantly pointed as defying aii possibility of being satisfactorily explained. The passage in question is recorded in 1 Sam. vi. 19 : " And he smote the men of Beth-shemesh, because they had looked into the ark of the Lord, even he smote of the people fifty thousand and three score and ten men ; and the people lamented because the Lord 10 \xx. INTRODUCTION. had smitten many of the people with a great slaughter," This is the rendering as given in the English version. Now, in order that the reader may see the full force of the difficulty, it will be necessary to give a brief outline of the whole occurrence. The ark of the Lord had fallen into the hands of the Philis- tines, as is recorded in 1 Sam. v., who brought iii to Ashdod, and placed it in the temple of Dagon. Here the )iower of the Lord made itself soon felt, for in the morning the idol was found lying prostrate before the ark. The Philistines evidently looked upon, this occurrence as a mere accident, for they set up the idol again in its place. But the followintj morning Dagon was not only again lying prostrate, but this time both head and palms were broken otf, so that there was nothing left but the stump. But even this occurrence apparently was not deemed sufficient cause to induce them to restore the ark ; the Lord therefore sent a grievous disease among the inhabi- tants of Ashdod. Now, although they acknowledged that the hand of God was sore upon them, and uf)on Dagon their god, they still persisted in retaining the ark in their country. Accordingly, after the lords of the Philistines had taken counsel together, they sent the ark unto Gatli, another city in their territory. It appears from this, that they must have still entertained some doubt whether the presence of the ark was the real cpuse of the plague. But no sooner had the ark arrived in that place, than the destroying angel appeared in that city also, and soon ** The agony of friends that part. The sob, the groan, the shriek was there ; ' And not one hope dawn'd on the heart, To cheer the general despair." The hand of God was also against that city, and smote " both small and great." But even yet the Philistines were loath to believe that the affliction came from the God of Israel ; they therefore determined to make still another trial, and conse- quently sent the ark to Ekron, a city on the borders of the tribe of Judah. No sooner had the ark entered that town than there was a deadly destruction in that city also ; they therefore consulted the priests d divines, who counselled them to make a new cart and tie two milcii cows to it, and place the ark, with a trespass offoring upon it, and send it away. They further told them to observe that if the cari went "by the way of his own coast to Beth-shemesh it would be a sign that it was the God of Israel who had afflicted them, but if not, they might know the visitation had conxe upon them by mere chance. Ihe Ekronites accordingly did as the priests had counselled them, and the sacred narrative tells us that the kine took a straight INTRODUCTION. IxxL. 7a,y to Beth-shemesh. At the time when the ark arrived at Jeth-shemesh the people were just reaping the wheat harvest in the valley, and when they saw the ark they rejoiced greatly, md the Levites came and placed it upon a great stone, which ras in the field where the cart had stopped of its own accoid. Now Beth-shemesh was one of the forty-eight cities that had seen set apart for the Priests and Levites, but as in course of time men belonging to other tribes also came to dwell in these bities, we may take it for granted that Beth-shemesh was no exception in this respect. It is ver>' importaiit that this point ^hould not be lost sight of, as it Avill assist greatly in account- ig for such an audacious crime having been committed in a jevitical town, that brought down such a heavy punishment !>n some of its inhabitants. It appears tha. shortly after the ark had arrived some men, 10 doubt prompted by curiosity, had the audacity actually " to look into the ark of the Lord." The great enormity of the crime becomes at once apparent when it is considered that the irk was the sacred symbol of Divine presence, and that even bhe Levites, who were not priests, were not allowed to touch br see the ark upon pain of death. (See Num. iv. .15.) And, indeed, the Levites, who were also priests, could not touch the irk, only Aaron and his son Eleazar, or Aaron's sons succeeding in the high priesthood, who had the oversight, with one other Ipriest assisting, were allowed to touch the ark, and this act Iwas to be performed, if fossihle, without their looking at it. !(See Num. iv.) In the construction of the ark by God's com- ijnand, special provision was made to supply it with two staves Ion the sides, which were never to be taken from it, by which lit was to be carried when necessary. (See Exod. xxv. 13, 14, 15.) The reader will now plainly comprehend to the full extent jthe Hwfulness of the crime committed by these audacious men, [for in order " to look into the ark " they had actually to take loff" the mercy-seat with the Cherubim upon it. Such a sacri- jlegious act, perpetrated by Israelites themselves, could not fail Ito bring down quickly the heavy judgment of God upon the joftenders, especially as He had just before exacted reverence Itowards the ark from the Philistines, an idolatrous people. Ilndeed, as far as the punishment is concerned, all critics are lagreed that it was well merited. Theie aie, however, three jobjections urged against the credibilit}' of the narrative. In ithe first place, it is maintained "as this was a Lev'tical town, lit is not ea.sily conceived that men who were set apsirt for the jspecial service of God and teachers of the people, and who jmust therefore have been well aware as to the punishment that jmust inevitably follow such an audacious act, should yet rush [heedlessly into the jaws of death. Secondly, as Beth-shemish Ixxii. INTRODUCTION. . i was only a small town, the number 50,070 said to have been | destroyed, is altogether irreconcilable with such a small place, even without taking in consideration that the whole popula- tion did not suffer, for it is distinctly stated, ' and the people j lamented,' which certainly implies that some had been left. And thirdly, to slay such a vast number of people on account of a rash act committed by a few persons is altogether incom- i patible with the notion of justice and mercj'." Now, as regards the first objection, there is but very little I difficulty in disposing of it. We have already stated thatj families from other tribes took up their abode in course of time in the towns set apart for the priests and Levites, and we may, therefore, safely conclude that the persons who committed the | offence were neither priests nor Levites. It is very likely that some thoughtless persons of those who had taken up their abode there, proipipted probably by curiosity to see what the ark con- tained, committed the sacrilegious act. Probably, too, some of the inhabitants of Beth-shemesh may, to some extent, havef become imbued with idolatrous notions by their frequent inter- course with the Philistines of the neighbouring cities, and with! their religious principles thus undermined, would more readily fall a prey to temf)tation. The second objection as to the great] number that is said to have perished on that occasion, pre- sents greater difficulties in reconciling it, and, indeed, both! orthodox, as well as rationalistic writers are so far agreed, that the number given in the text is altogether too excessive. Here, however, they part company. For the former, whilst acknow- ledging the existing difficulty, still maintain that it yet admits of a sati.sfiietory solution, whilst the latter, on the other hand,] persistently maintain, " that it is only one of the many extra- vagant statements with which the Bible abounds." The op ponents of Scripture may iind such an argument very con-j venient: it saves a great deal of trouble, and requires very little! learning, and, no doubt, there are many who are quite satisfied! with the mere dictum of those apostles of free thought ; but j there are happily myriads who require something more than! mere assertion to shake their faith in the inspiration of Scrip- ture. Now we readily admit, that at first sight, it does appear no! easy task to solve the knotty point how 50,070 persons could! be destroyed in a single town or village of no great importance,! and besides some to be left to mourn for the slain ? Or to! find a satisfactory reply to sceptics who maintain "that the! slaughter of so many persons for what may have after all been! merely a rash act of a few thoughtless men, was altogether! indefensible." But when we can show that even these appar- ently unaurmountable difficulties can be explained in a satis-l INTRODUCTION. Ixxiii. factory manner, it ought, we think, serve as a caution, not to rive too readily credence to objections urged against the Scrip- lure. As might naturally be expected, various theories have been Ivanced in the endeavour of reconciling or accounting for the irgc m.mlier said to have been slain ; but of all there are but \yfo which are deserving of notice. In the first place, it has been maintained by some critics, that mnny of the inhabitants of neighbouring cities may iave come to Beth-sheniesh to celebrate the joyful occasion jf the return of the ark from the country of the Philistines." this theory could be maintained it would certainly at once jmove the difficuliy which the number 50,070 presents, ltlio«igh it would still leave the objection of the sceptics as jo-ards the severitj of the punishment, unanswered. On Ixaminiug the Scriptave narrative, however, more closely it rill at once become apparent that the hypothesis of a large fathering on that occasion is altogether untenable, and for the following reasons : It is quite evident, that the ark arrived at Beth-shemesh Unexpectedly, for it is said : "And they of Beth-shemesh were japing their wheat harvest in the valley ; and they lifted up leir eyes, and saw the ark, and rejoiced to see it." (1 Sam. lo.) Further, the inhabitants of Beth-shemesh being reatly terrified at the calamit}' that had just befallen the city, felt anxious to have the ark removed from their place, and for that purpose "sent messengers to the inhabitants of Kirjath- learim, saying, 'The Philistines have brought again the ark of fche Lord ; come ye down, and fetch it up to you.' " (v. 21.) I'roni this passage it is clear that the people of Kirjath-jearim :ne\v nothing of the return of the ark, although it was only a Jew miles distant from Beth-shemesh. The theory of a gather- ig of people from the neighbouring cities can, therefore, not for one moment be entertained. In the second place, it has been maintained by a very large uunber of eminent critics that the number, " fifty thousand," lid not originally belong to the text, but was a marginal note rliich crept into the text through the carelessness of some transcribers, so that the actual number slain was only I' seventy." Now I have already stated that no conscientious iTitcr will have recourse to this mode of treatment, unless there jxi.sts sufficient ground to justify the assumption of interpola- tion. To i-eject a passage of Scripture as spurious, no matter low very small, the reader will admit is a responsibility which ^hould not be assumed without the most careful con.sideration, ilthough I am sorry to say very many modern critics exercise freedom in this respect hardly commensurate with the sanctity Ixxiv. INTRODUCTION. of the subject. Even Bishop Lowth, in his commentary on Isaiah, has rejected passages as interpolations which I feel satisfied, in the present advanced state of Hebrew philology and mode of criticism, can most satisfactorily be explained. As already hinted, the interpolations are fortunately very readily detected, and the passage under consideration presents such striking peculiarities in its structure that any one conversant with the mode of expressing Hebrew numerals will at once per- ceive that the number "fifty thousand" must be a later addi- tion. The literal rendering of the Hebrew text is, " and he smote among the men of Beth-shemesh, for they looked in the ark of the Lord, and he smote among the people seventy men, fifty thousand men." (1 Sam. vi. 19.) This is very diffierent from the rendering given in the English version, although the sense is the same : " And he smote the men of Beth-shemesh, because they had looked into the ark of the Lord, even he smote of the people fifty thousand and three score and ten men." The passage in the Hebrew text presents no less than three departures from the ordinary mode of expressing numerals. In the first place, when the number thousand is used, it is generally placed first and the other numbers follow in the order of their magnitude, as for example ; (Exod. xxxviii. 2G,) for every one that went to be numbered from twenty years old and upwards, for six hundred thousand and three thousand and five hundred men" (See also other examples. Num. i). In the passage under consideration "fifty thousand" follows the smaller number. Secondly, in the present editions of the Hebrew Bible the words "seventy men" are separated from the words "fifty thousand men" by one of the $econd class disjunctive accents, which I have indicated in my rendering above by a comma. Thirdly, the two numbers are not connected by the conjunc- tive and which is indispensible in expressing compound num- bers. The absence of the conjunctive and alone even, if there w^ere no other peculiarity, would be quite sufficient to indicate the numeral " fifty thousand" to be an interpolation, as in such cases it is never omitted. If the reader will refer to the genealo- gical record, Gen. v., he will find a number of examples to prove the correctness of my statement. But we may further remark, there are still some manuscripts extant in which the number "fifty thousand" does not at all occur, and that that number was not given in some manuscripts in the time of Josephus, is also evident, for the Jewish historian, in speaking of the occurrence, says, " But now it was that the wrath of God overtook them, and struck seventy persons of the village of Beth-shemesh dead " From this it is clear that the manuscripts which Josephus con- sulted, and which, no doubt, were the best extant, did not con- tain the number " fifty thousand" in the text, for the historian INTRODUCTION. Ixxv. rould certainly not have taken the responsibility upon himsell' ► omit the number. All these circumstances clearly indicate beyond a shadow of loubt that the words " fifty thousand" did not originally belong . the text, but have been erroneously inserted by some copyist ^hose interpolation was again copied by other transcribers, and BO was handed down until it finally found its way into our printed editions. This, we feel satisfied, is the proper solution [)f the apparent difficulty ; and, we feel equally satisfied, that fcverj' unbiased critic will admit that the explanation we have riven is incontiovertible. •anthropomorphism. The constant use of anthropomorphic expressions throughout Scripture, has also been the cause of shocking the sensitive feelings of some of our modern Biblical critics. They have jome to the conclusion " that they originated from the imper- fect conception that the Biblical writers must have had of God," .whether they ever looked for any other mode of accounting for them I do not know, but judging from the very easy man- ler that the origin of these expressions may be explained, their critical acumen could certainly not have been brought into [great requisition. There is Tiot the slightest intimation of any [Jewish writer ascribing to God a human form, and throughout jail ages of the Christian Church's history such a doctrine was jregarded as heretical. It is true that in the fourth century a [Syrian divine, whose native name was Udo, generally called Audajus, formed a sect in Mesopotamia, who held that the language employed in the Old Testament fully justified the belief that God had a senf^'ble form, a tenet which Afterwards [also widely spread among the Egyptian Christians. The doc- trine was, however, denounced as heretical, and consequently gradually disappeared altogether after the death of its founder, 1 which took place about A.D. 370. In the middle of last century this doctrine made its appear- [ance again in a somewhat modified form by Priestly, ascribing to the Deity a sort of subtile body, a notion which was also [adapted by Hobbs, Foster, and a few others. Were it not for I tlie testimony of their own writings, one would feel inclined to doubt the possibility of men of such learning having entertained such absurd notions, for we maysnfely say few school children of ordinary capacity of mind would find any diificulty in rightly understanding the anthropomorphic expressions of Scripture, although they might not exactly be able to explain why such * Anthropomorphism. From the Greek ivOpvitos {anthrdpos) man, and fiop^n {morphe) a form. i. e. the application of terms which properly belong to the human being in a figurative manner, to God. if Ixxvi. INTRODUCTION. figurative expressions should have been employed by the sacrd writers. But there is no accounting for the absurd notions | that even some of the most eelebrateil minds will not some- times indulge in, and it should serve as a warning to the Bible I reader not to allow himself to be carried away by every new] theory which some heated fancy may spring upon the world. Tiie gJcatest portion of the Old 'lestament being written in poetry — as we shall hereafter clearly show — it naturally abounds in highly figurative language which the sacred writers employed not merely for the purpose of embellish- ing their writings, but more especially to lend force to their declarations and to render them at the same time more impressive. Anthropomorphism whilst coming in one respect within the range of poetic diction, ditters, however, materially from the ordinay figurative language in one important point, I the latter whilst unquestionably of great utility, yet is not an absolute necessity, the idea expressed in figurative language, might have been expressed in ordinary language, though per- haps not with equal force; the former, on the contrary, is indis- pensiblo in order to bring God's dealings with men within the I comprehension of the human understanding. The force of these remarks will at once become apparent, when it is taken into consideration, that the government of the ancient Jews was a theocracy, Jehovah was not only Israel's God, but also its King and Chief Ruler, and being a Spirit, it was absolutely necessary to make use of anthropomorphic expressions in con- veying His commands, or in making known His Will, or in expressing His pleasure or displeasure, and hence we find such expressions en)ployed in the prose as well as in the poetical writings. Thus Moses, in expiessing God's great displeasure' at the wickedness prevailing before the flood, says: "And it i grieved him at His heart, (Gen. vi. G), indicating the most intense grief. In expressing God's delight at the pious act of Noah in his offering a burnt-offering immediately on his coming out of the ark, as a thank-offering for the mercies ] vouchsafed to him and to his family, the sacred writer says : "And the Lord smelled the sweet odour ; and the Loud said in his heart : I will not curse the ground any more for man's I sake." (Gen. viii. 21.) The expression to smell a sweet odour, denotes in Biblical phraseology, to take delight in, to be accep- table, and, accordingly the passage before us, is rendered in the Chaldee version: "The Lord accepted with favour his oblation." Hence we read also in Lev. xxvi. 31 : "1 will not smell the savour of your sweet odours," i. e., I will not accept your sacrifices. God's favour or pleasure, is sometimes spoken of by the lift- ing up of His countenance, or by the light of His countenance INTRODUCTION. Ixxvii. Lnm<; upon any one, whilst His displeasure is spoken of by ]<8 turning away, or hiding His face. As nn;jrer naturally tows itself by hard breathing through the nostrils, hence the Lath of God is spoken of as breath or smoke issuing from iis nostrils. Again, when God threatens any nation with inishment His hand or arm is said to be stretclied out. lese and such like expressions, as we have said, are merely iployed to depict in a forcible manner God's dealings with an, which could not possibly have been so forcibly conveyed another manner. Tillotson, in speaking of the anthropo- prphites of old, has very justly observed : " If God is pleased I stoop to our weakness, we must not therefore level Him to infirmities." MIRACLES. I As might naturally be expected in the exercise of the freedom criticism adopted by so many modern Biblical critics, the [iracles recorded in Scripture have not been permitted to go ichallenged. It is maintained (as by Hume and many others) iat supernatural occurrences are altogether impossible, inas- mck as they contravene the established laws of nature. In bring- lig forth this argument they seem, however, to have entirely /erlooked the fundamental truth, that a laiv presupposes a iaker of the law, and, therefore, these very " laws of nature " jon which this argument is based in themselves presu|)pose8 Giver or Founder of these laws. The law has yet to be found which it can be said, it has made itself, and those who can ring themselves to believe that the laws that govern the lovements of the countless heavenly bodies are self-existing, lust indeed possess imaginative powers far surpassing those rith which the generality of human beings are endowed. If it must, then, be conceded that these laws of nature owe leir origin to an Almighty Being, where, then, is the difficulty lat that Being, with whom nothing is impossible, may perform ats for certain purposes, which, after all, only may appear to [u-r finite understanding as contravening the laws of nature? say may appear, lor in reality no one can form the slightest lea how the miracles were produced ; those who saw them ler^ly saw the results, but absolutely knew nothing as to the lanner how they were performed. It is, therefore, altogether in arbitrary assumption on the part of our critics to assert that p ,7 va->^ /I-ft^^f jiuch supernatural manifestations are impossible, or that they ' ' ^ C' that way. Woods possessing such I corrective properties, are found in some other parts of the Globe. Thus, for : instance, the sassafras tree in Florida ; the nelumaram tree foond on the coast Ixxx. INTRODUCTION. they could not drink the water on account of its bitterness, God did not provide water by a minicle, but rather chose to employ natural means, and showed Moses " a tree," (Exod. xv. 25), which possessed the properti'^s of turning the water sweet. It was, however, different when the Israelites entered the more i'l desolate parts of the wilderness, here no water could be obtained, unless by direct miracles ; and after all, during their forty years' wandering in the desert, only in three places was the water supplied by supernatural means. The fallacy of the outcry raised against the miracles of the Bible on the ground of contravening the established laws of nature will at once become apparent, when it is taken into con- sideration, in the Hrst place, that He who founded those laws by His Almighty Power, is surely able by the same Power, if He sees fit, to suspend or change any one of these laws according to His Will by which all things are governed. Secondly, that God, in His Wisdom, has not made these laws in all cases unal- terable, and has even endowed man with the power to alter them iti some cases. In fact, exceptional modes of action in the laws of natui'e arc by no means of uncommon occurrence, and are brought ab'nit in two ways. In the first place, by a freak of nature iLseif, and thus, l)oth in animal;-, and plants, when, under certain conditions, the operations of the ordinary natural laws are afi'ected, and the result is the production of what naturalists tsrm mondrosities, which in animals are always regarded as deformities, though not nece.ssarily always in plants. Mills, in his " System of Logic," has given an illus- tration of the possible break of uniformity. "Not the instances," he says, " which have been observed since the beginning of ths world, in suj>port of the proposition that all crows are black, would be deemed a sufficient presumption of the (-ruth of the pioposition, to outweigh the testimony of one unexceptionable witness who should affirm that in one region of the earth, not fully explored, he had caught and exa lUied a crow and found it to be gray." "■ It is true, that since the year 171)0, v/hen the poet von GaHhe published his celebrated treatise, " Die Metamorphose f'^' J J ' "■(^ '*^-rv« >*^'^^' Pfianzen," i. e., the Metamorphosis of Plants, much attention ii| ' ^^— t * ^ ^^^ been directed V)y naturalists to this branch of botany, now ' ' ^"^ called vegetable morphology, by which many of the facts and laws that produce those metamorphoses have been ascertained^ of v'oromandel ; the yerv.i cajiiani plant found in Peru ; the phylanthus emblica in East India. It ia said, thut the first inducement of the Chinese to the general use of tea, was to corrcci; the Wiiter of tlieir rivers. In E^jypt, as the water of the Nile ia always somewhat muddy, the people prepare bitter almonds in a certain way with which they rub the (jarthou ve.'sssls in which the w.iter is kept, by which the water is rendered quite clear and salutary. ti^- Y^C'^^j^ '^'^y. /\,i/-tvvj OKt, .Tk /w $••>.{. >> I '4i^'^'fii 'mo.. \4 ryW\r*~^Ji C> 'T-tr* ,-- -^ ■V A.T J •\K ■VA' (m-,. ^r ii.>A>- 'M:^. .^v-.o ^.. «^^- ^V~y«-.V.'*' \J) :i i^f '\'V~\A ^' t..i ^ ►Vfl' /'o I INTRODUCTION, Ixzxi. jtill there are occurring now and then in the vegetable as well in the animal kingdom, freaks of nature, the causes of which /ill ever remain a mysterj'. The nmnstrocities themselves, lowever, whether the laws or causes that pr(»duce them are mown or unknown, conclusively prove that the so-called laws )f nature were never intended to be unaltei'ably fixed to confine le freedom of God in the government of the universe. In the second place, God, in His wisdom, has even endowed lan with the knowledge wherehv he is enabled for certain jeneficial purposes to interfere 'vith the ordinar}^ working of jjhe laws of nature. Here we need otdy mention the art of Producing hybrids so freely practised by agriculturists and lorists, by means of which some of the most gorgeous double |ower.s have been produced. Nowhere, perhaps, is this meta- lorphosis more conspicuous than in the Camellia Japonica. It s, indeed, difficult to realize how a plant bearing such an insig- jificant single red flower in its wild state should he made to jroduce such magnificent double flowers of varioiiH shades, iow^n to .spotless white. With such examples before them it is kruly amazing to find critics object to the miracles of the Bible )n the ground of their apparently contrav ning the established laws of nature, thus making man more powerful than the Deity. But further, it our Biblical critics will really believe nothing 3ut what, they can satisfactorily account for, what have they to .vay about the sudden appearance and disappearance of liiumerous stars ? Have astionomers, after all, for centuries Dast been merely hoaxing the whole world about these heavenly Dodies, and set scientific men to rai^k iheir brain in the vain endeavour to account for their eccentric behaviour ? It must |be no, if these critics are correct in their conclusion that nothing can exist or i^as e.icisted unless what can be accounted for by iman. Milner, in his Gallery of Nature, p. 1(56, remarks : "When hve compare the present appearance of thf sidereal heavens with jthe n^cords of former catalogues, some stars aie not to be found mow whose places have been registered. There are four in Hercules, four in Cancer, one in Perseus, one in Pisces, one in Hydr.i,, nnd one in Orion, and two in Berenice's Hair, which have iipparently disappeared from thv sky. OT the eight stars jforniciiy mentioned which were marked in the catalogue of Ptoloniy, but nad l>een lost in the time of Uiugh Beg, there jweie six near ihe Southevn Fish, which have nut been ubseived jfince ; and as fovir of tliese were of t!.e thiid magnitude, Bailly jconclinles that t!;ey were really visible in tlie heavens in the age of Ptih.niy, and diisappeaied in the interval between hira land the Tartar prince." Milner continues; "It is. no doubt. [proiiable that apparent losses have often arisen from mistaken 12 I t • ■ if um Ixxxii. INTRODUCTION. entries ; yet, in many inatances it is certain that there is no mistake in the observation or entry, and that stara have really been obsei'ved, and as really disappeared." In the years 17HI and 1782 Herschel observed a star of the fifth magnitude, -55 Herculis, in the catalogue Flarnstead; but nine years after- wards it entirely disappeared, and has never since been seen. Montenari, in the year 1670, remarked : " There are now wnnt- ing in the heavens two stars of the second magnitude in the stern and yard of the ship Argo. I and others observed them in the year 1(>64, upon the occasion of the comet that appeared that year. When they first disappeared I know not ; only I am sure that on the 10th of April, 166H, there was not the least glimpse of them to be seen." In May, 1828, Herschel mi.ssed a star in Virgo, inserted in Baron Zach's catalogue, and it has ne\er been .seen again. Whil.st .some stai's have entirely di.sappeured new ones made their appearance. "There are .some .stars now," observes Milner, p. 160, "in the heavens which are supposed to I have only recently become visible. No entry of them occurs in' the catalogues of former observers who have registered objects j of inferior magnitude in their neighbourhood, and who would] not therefore have on)itted these had they been present. Thus I a star in the head of Cepheus, one in Gemini, another in Equu- leus, and several others, are not given in Flamstead's catalogue. These are probably new, as that most accurate observer of the! heavens could hardly have omitted them. Since the year 1826 a star in the nebula of Orion has appeared." Then again, there are instances recorded as unaccountable asj it may appear of stars starting into temporary visibility,} shining for a time with great lustre, and then entirely van- ishing. " An instance of this kind," says Milner, " occurred inl the year 389 of our era. In the neighbourhood of Altair, inl the constellation Acquila, a star suddenly appean d, continuingj as brilliant as Venus for three weeks. Other stellar appavititmsl are recorded in the years 94.5 and 1264; but the most remarkahlej one occurred in 1.572." "The star," continues Milner, " whiclij glowed with great brilliancy, and continued visible for eightoenj months, appeareil in Cassiopeia, immediately under the .sen- bellum or Cliair of the Lady." Keppler observed a new star in| Serpentarius, in the year 1604. It bhized forth in g^oat splen- dour lor twelve months, then disappeared, and hasnoi been seeui since. Keppler remarked about this star : " What it rnayj portend is hard to determine, and this much only is certaiiiT that it comes to ttdl mankind either nothing at all, or high aiidj weighty news, tpiite beyond human sense and understanding.' In the year 1670 another temporary star was observed vjl Hevelius and Don Athelme, on the 20th June, in the head! Cygnu.s. The last of these unexpected visitors made its appear- INTRODUCTION. Ixxxiii. there is no have really ) years 1781 agnitude, 55 years after- e been seen, •e now want- litude in the aserved them ,hat appeared F not ; only I M not the least M chel missed a f d it has never y disappeared le stars now," e supposed to liem occurs in' stered objects d who would resent. Thusj ther in Equu- j ad's catalogue, jserver of the the year 1826 ance on the night of April 28, 1848; it was noticed by Mr. Hind in a pait of Ophiuchus It exhibited no change, but gradually diminished in brightness, and became extinct. Milner says : " There are now seven or eight well-attested cases of jBxed stars suddenly glowing from out of the sombre bosom of infinity, shining with great vivacity for an interval, so as to be visible" even in the da-j time through the intensity of their lif'ht, then gradually fading away and becoming entirely extinct." (Gallery of Nature, p. 108). Here then presents itself the momentous question, how are the sudden ai»pearance and disappearance ofthe.se stellar appa- ritions to be accounted for ? On the occasion of the appearance of the biilliantstar in 1572, above alluded to, some i)hilo.sophers of that time endeavoured to account for its appearance by adopting the Epicurean doctrine, " of a fortuitous concourse of atoms, whose combination in this stellar form was merely one of the endless varieties of ways in which they have been arranged." * " Keppler," says Milner, " too enlightened to be attracted by such worn-out hypothesis when advanced upon a subsequent occa.sion, thus alludes to it with a characteristic- oddity : — ' When I was a youth, with plenty of idle time on my hands, I was much taken with the vanity, of which some grown men are not ashamed, of making anagrams, by trans- posing the letters of my name written in Latin, so as to make another sentence : out of Johannes Kepleras came Serpens in akideo (a .serpent in his stirig). But not being satisfied with the meaning of these words, and being unable to make another, I trusted the thing to chance, and taking out of a pack of playing cards as many as there were letters in my name, wrote one upon each, and then began to shuflSc them, and then at each shuffle to read them in the order they came, and see if any meaning came of it. Now may all the Epicurean gods and goddesses confound this same chance ! which, although I spent a great deal of time over it, never showed me anything like sense, even at a distance. So I gave up my cards to Epicurean eter- nity, to be carried into infinity, and it is said they are still I flying above there in the utmost confusion among the atoms, and hav^ never yet come to any meaning. I will tell these disputants, my opponents, not my opinion, but my wife's. Yesterday when very weary with writing, and my mind quite dusty with considering these atoms, I was called to supper, and a sdad I had asked for was set before me. ' It .seems, then,' said I aloud, ' that if pewter dishes, leaves of lettuce, grains of salt, drops of vinegar and oil, and slices of egg. had been flyincr * Keppler. or Kepler, was born at Magatadt, a email village in the kiagdom [of Wurtemburg, 27th December, 1571. ^ I" t:' P. ']' JWj." rt- wv Ixxxiv. INTRODUCmON. ^^t-^ji'-r^yl-*^-^ about in the nir from all eternity, it might at least happen by f \ ^ chance that there would come a salad.' ' Yes,* said my wife, '^^iX^"^ c».A.^' I ^J^^^. jjqj. qjjp jjq jjjgg Qj. ^gjj dressed as this of mine is.' " ryy..^ 4-sked by an eminent jhysician of San Francisco to explain this point. Many writers who have treated upon this subject have expressed the )pinion that the magicians were by Divine permission allowed to perform those miracles, in order that Pharaoh might larden his heart, and not let the children of Israel go. On a jloser examination of the subject it will, however, be found tliat such an assumption is by no means necessary, and that, on the contrary, the pretended miracles of the magicians were lerely the results of skilled sleight of hand performance. The Egyptians, from the remotest times, were highly skilhid In the art of charming serpents, which is still the case at the Present time to a very great extent. So wonderful is their )erf(>rmance with snakes, that modern travellers, who made it their special business to watch them closely, and indeed even to make them strip themselves of their clothes to see whether they had any serpents concealed among their garments, were completely baffled by their mysteiious performances. Nor is their conjuring of serpents restricted to the hannless species, 3ut they handle and even provoke to anger the most deadly species, and let them creep about their bodies with impunity. In a treatise, (De I'art ophiogenes ou enchanteurs des serpens, in t. 18, of the De.scr. p. 333 seq.) we have the following state- lent : " We confess, that we, far removed from all easy iredulity, have ourselves been witnesses of some things so I'onderful, that we cannot consider the art of the setpont- tamers as entirely chimerical. We believed at first that they removed the teeth of serpents and stings of scorpions, but 7Q have had an opportunity to convince ourselves of the con- trary." " I am persuaded," remarks Quatremfere, " that there rere certain number of men found among the Psylli of 'i 'tr; M' Ixxxvi. INTRODUCTION. antiquity, who by certain secret preparations put themselves in a condition not to fear the bite of serpents, and to handle the most poisonous of them uninjured." In another place, says the same author: "In Egypt, and the neighbouring countries, there are men and women, who truly deserve the name of Psylli, and who uninjured handle the cerastes and other serpents, wliose poison pi'oduces immediate death." (Quatremfere, p. 210.) In the " Description de I'Egypte," (i. p. 159), we find the following statement : " The serpent Haje, is that sort of reptile whicli th;* jugglers of Ca-ro know how to turn to account ; they tame it, and teach it a great number of tricks more or less extraordinary ; they can, as they say, change the Hnje into a stick, and make it appear like dead." The Psylli form an association claiming to be the only persons who pi'ofess the art of charming serpents, and to free houses from them, and this art is handed down from father to son. The magicians were always greatly revered by the Eastern people, and looked upon as workers of miracles. They cai'ried staffs as an insignia of their priestly dignity, and it is therefore highly pi'obable that the staffs which they carried when summoned before Pharaoh weiv nothinjr else than such charmed serpents which had the appearance of sticks as long as they remained in a rigid state, but which naturally became manifest serpents by the action of being, thrown on the ground.* Different writers l)ear testimony asi to the mode by which they render the serpents jierfectly stiff,] and again awake them from their torpor. It apparently occupies but a very short time. They spit in the throat ofl the animal, then compel it to close its mouth, and lay it upon the ground. Then in order to give the la-;t command, theyj lay their hand upon its head, and immediately, it becomes! perfectl}'^ stiff and motionless, the re[)tile falls into a kind of torpor. If they wish to arouse it, they seize it by the tail and] merely roll it between the hands and the serpent becomes quite] lively again, y ■..,,' — .-';/■ -,> ; ,,,,,. * The supposition that the magiciana changed the stafifs into serpents merely I by legerdemain is likewise favoured by tlie language employed by the sacred j writers, which reads : "Now the magicians of Egypt, they also did in like! manner GrT^tSnbSl (belaliatehem) with their secred arts." (Exod. vii. 2.) According to the form of the Hebrew woi'd here, it is evidently derived from] the root tStlb {(ahat) to flame, to dazzle, hence, literally with their dazzling perl formances. So the eminent Jewish commentators, Eben, Ezra, Maimonities,! Jarchi. In verse 22, however, where the same expression occurs, thej word appears in a dififerent form Cn^tjbill (hi'latehem) which would indicate! it to bo derived from the root t0^3 (balat) to hide, hence hidden arts, i.e.X unknown to others. In the Targum it is rendered in both places, " with theirl spells." In Rabbi Solomon Hakkoheu's German version, printed in Hebrflwj characters, it is rendered, "durch ihre verborgene Kunste," i. e, throughl their concealed arts. The Hebrew word does not imply the use of superT natural power. INTRODUCTION. Ixxxvii. b themselves nd to handle lother place, neighbouring deserve the cerastes and Hate death." I'Egypte," (i. The serpent lers of Ca^ro ind teach it a ry; they can, ake it appear ning to be the rpents, and to d down t'ri)in tly revered by •s of miracles. y dignity, and fe which they ' nothin^: else appearance of Lte, but which [jtion of being ,r testimony as I i perf(;ctly stiff, It apparently 1 the throat of! ,nd lay it upouj ;onnnand, they ily. it l)ecomesj into a kind of Iby the tail and becomes quite We come next to the statement that the magicians also lurned the water into blood. And here we may at the outset jmark, that according to the Hebrew mode of expression, it by no means necessary to understand that the waters of Cfrypt were turned into actual blood, but merely in appear- nce, like in 2 Kings iii. 22, 23, " and the Moabites saw the rater on the other side red as blood. And they said. This is ^lood : the kings are surely slain." But the water was only in appearance. According to Joel iii. 4, (Eng. vers. ch. ii. il), "The sun shall be turned into darkness, and the moon into lood," which can only mean in ap[)earance. There .vas there- &re no great difficulty in the magicians changing a little water ||ito the colour of blood, either by the aid of chemicals or by Dine other process known to them. It could after all only ive been a small quantity obtained by digging, for Moses had >^\ ioiisly turned all the visible water into blood. A little irric chloride with a little sulphocynnide of 'potassium, )ured into a glass of water will tnni it at once to a blood-red The Ibrmer is of a very pale yellow colour, whilst the lour. itter is not distinguishable from water by its colour. Any- le can try this experiment. I do not wish to be understood say, that these veiy chemicals were employed, but it shows low very easy a deception may be practised. But whilst they lanaged in some way to turn the water into a resemblance of [lood, they were not able to change it back again into water. They were perfectly powerless to procure drinkable water by leir secret arts, for we read : " And all the Egyptians digged 3und about the river for water to drink ; for they could not hink of the water of the river." (Exod. vii. 24.) The}' Avould kot have endured such a privation if there had been a possibility If avoiding it, as the Nile water is almost the only drinkable ater in Egypt, the water of the wells, of which there are not lany in the country, is both distasteful and unwholesome. m idea may be formed of the great esteem in vvhicli the water If the Nile is held, by a common saying prevalent among the people, that "if Mohammed had drank thereof, he would have sked immortality of God, so that he might always drink of lis water." The sacred writer tells us that the magicians of Egypt did lis also tDn'i'Db^ (belatehem) with, their secret arts. (Eng. ^ers., " with their enchantments.") We may remark here, that many writers on the science of /hemistry award to the Egyptians the honour of having fur- bished the very earliest information concerning chemical arts. [t is said that a paper has recently been discovered by Prof leorge Ebers, at Thebes, in which the writer gives a vast Imount of information on medical practice and the pharmaceu- ' ;i>t; Ixxxviii. INTRODUCTION. magician^ tical preparations at the remote time in which he lived sixteenl hundred years before the Christian era, all written less obscureljl than by many writers of the present age. This would brinj it back, according to Calmet'a chronological table, to about thej time of Joseph. We turn next to the third miracle which the managed to imitate to the satisfaction of the superstitioiiji king. And here again they had the objects at their comniandj and merely required to bring their secret arts into action Frogs are at all times very plentiful in Egypt, especially thi species rana punctata, the spotted Egyptian frog, which is oi an ash colour, with green spots. The sacred narrative infornii« us, that the magicians also brought up frogs by their secre; arts. (Eng. vers. " enchantments.") But whilst they wert^ able by means of skilful jugglery to make it appear to thi satisfaction of Pharaoh, that they could also produce fiogs, the; were not able to remove them again. Had they been able accomplish this feat, the haughty king would not have so humi liated himself as to call for Moses and Aaron, and ask them " entreat the Lord that He may take away the frogs," an promise also that he would " willingly let the people go. (Exod. viii. 4.) At first sight it seems somewhat surprisi that the King did not perceive by their incapacity of freein| the land from the frogs, that the magicians must have imposei upon him, but the magicians were regarded by the Easteri Eeople with superstitious awe, and looked upon as sacri eings, and they may easily have persuaded Pharaoh th they were hindered from doing it, by a more powerli deity. ' When we come to the third plague where the objects n longer existed wherewith to practice their skilful jugglerj and as the learned Rabbi Nachmp.nides has justly observed new creation had first to be affected, they proved themselvi perfectly powerless. They were unalle to produce *gniil such as Aaron had produced by merely smiting the dust of tl earth with his staff. It was their policy of couise to make aj least an attempt, or else the king would have at once suspectei that their former performances were merely the results ol juggerly; but having made a trial, they could fall back upoij * It ia now generally admitted that by H53 {kinnim,) gnats are meant, 1 not "lice," as in the English version. The Hebrew student will observe, thil in verse 13, the plural form is only defectively written, which indeed is somej times the case, the regular form however occurs immediately afterwards. "" ▼erb "iWJjyn (yd&su) in v. 14, is evidently used there in the sense "they trid to do, and not as in our version, "they did;" this is evident from context, for they did not succeed. INTRODUCTION. Ixxxix. 0 produce *gn!ii e plea, that this was the act of a more powerful deity.* After is signal failure Pharaoh seems to have lost all confidence in H magicians, for it is not recorded that he had again recourse them in the plagues that followed. The miracles recorded in the Old Testament are so inseparably iterwoven with the history of the Jews as to render it impos- le to remove them from its pages without destroying the ole history. If, indeed, the miracles are mere figments, then iry nuiny portions at least of the history must necessarily be ments likewise. It admits of no half measures ; all that is orded about the bondage of the Israelites, their forty years' ndering in the wilderness, together with the various occur- ces that are said to have taken place during that time, and ir finally taking possession of the promised land, must stand fall with the miracles of Moses. And this, my reader, is by means all that the denial of the miracles implies. It implies ther that all the sacred writers who, from time to time, so lingly appealed to these events when denouncing the great ckedness of the people and declaiming against their ungrate- 1 and rebellious conduct towards the Almighty who had done^^/. l^-J^Xs^J, ,ch marvellous deeds in their behalf, after all only deliberately ^ ' / ceived their hearers by referring to events which had never ^2*=-^ ' ^ <^* . en place ; nay more, even representing God as referring to^^ //" 9 ^4,f -^ em. Is it possible to conceive, that men so meek, so holy, - 'f^^^'^-'r Hh- devoted to the service of God and the welfare of their nation, oarrv^«-'vv.<. ^ llingly suffering the greatest privations, persecutions, and if ,^r? dition speaks the truth, even in some cases laying down ''r»^W-vw^"0^/^ leir lives in f martyrdom, would be guilty of such an impious > hy 4. It? ^7 . ' yyy^ The history of the Hebrews in itself, from beginning to end,"^ c^s.-^ Ax C**?/ CX^^ rw-ir- I : The magicians did not say it was the finger of .Tehovah, the God of the elites, whose messenger Moses said he was, but that it was "the finger of him," which term is also sometimes applied to idols. (See Exod. xx. 3.) ey evidently endeavoured to make the king believe that this miracle was not duced by the power of Moses and Aaron, but by a deity or deities of his "-V n, and their assertion apparently had the desired effect, for it is immediately ^^^ ed, " and the heart of Pharaoh remained hardened, and he hearkened not r\ V j , /■ them." Ch. viii. 15.) We may also observe, that the expression, "finger (/^-^^-^i/ -y ^l God," like the expression, "hand of God," iaQ3.i\H the power of God. ^, ,*^, ^ , ' ■ According to an old tradition preserved in the Rabbinical writings, Isaiah \, ^ y _ 'ered martyrdom by being sawn asunder in the beginning of the reign of the c' a'^^ ^^' ''^ ' ked king Manasseh. The reason assigned by the blood-thirsty tyrant who, thout compunction, shed rivers of innocent blood in Jerusalem, was, that iah had said, "I saw the Lord sitting on the throne," (ch. vi. 1,) which itradicted Moses, who said, " No man shall see roe, and live. (Exod. xxxiii. But this was a mere pretence, the real reason was, the pro{)het having ^lly raised his voice against the enormities which Manasseh committed. There is also an ancient tradition that Jeremiah was put to death at Zaphris lEgypt, by the Jews of that place, who took ofifence at his reproaches and fenaces ; and it is by many believed that these martyrdoms are referred to |Hebrew3 xL37 " They were stoned, thay were aawa asunder." w if 1 i-: /rr..ov-~ oJ V '5'. \^\r~f xc. INTRODUCTION. bears the stamp of a most truthful record. It is natural that a I historian influenced by patriotism, and love of father'and should endeavour to place his own country and nation in the most favourable light; in fact, say as little that is unfavourable and as much that is favourable as possible. Besides theie are many circumstances which may influence the most conscientious chronicler of events in his narration, especially in recording the acts of favourites, friends or relations. He may regard it of no great consequence to withhold little shortcomings here and there, as of no gieat importance to the p'lblic, whilst they might only detract from their otherwise good character. Now let the reader go through the Bible from the beginning to the end, and carefully note at every page whether one sinfjle act can be pointed out that savours of favouritism. Whether the short-comings of the most pious, or of the nearest relatives, are not recorded with the utmost imj)artiaJity and 'delity. The! Israelites as a nation, from their departure out of Kgypt tol their dispersion, are re|)resented as a most ungrateful andl rebellious peo[)le, even more ungrateful than the most stupidj of the animals. , " The ox knoM'eth his owner, ; • I ' And the ass his master's crib. . i. ,; But Israel doth not know */(w wrt«wever, who flourished about 300 B. C, makes some allusion the dwelling of the Israelites in Egypt; and although his itements are greatly disguised, still they are sufliciently !)inted as to render it certain to whom they refer. It is ijnerally believed that Manetho was one of the priests of [eliopolis, and at the request of Ptolomy Philadelphus wrote Greek, a political history of E.-^^ypt, and an account of the fcligious tenets of the Egyptians. In order to invest his istory with as much importance as ])0ssible, Manetho pro- Issed to have derived his information from the sacred inscrip- lons on the pillais of Hermes-Trismegistus, and other sacred tcords. This history has shared to a great extent the same Ite as many other writings of antiquity, only a few extracts iven by Josephus in his work against Apion, and an epitome Eusibius, and some other ecclesiastical writers having 3me down to us. Fi-om the portions which are preserved, I when occurring I * We may here notiue an objection raiaed by modern critics in regard to the (ime "Moses." The Hebrew term is ntU^S [Mosheh), and lexicographers gen- [•ally are accustomed to derive it from the Hebrew verb nt25?3 {Mashah) to •aw out ; in reference to the ark of bulrushes which contained the child being raM'n out from the Nile rushes. Now modern critics have laid hold of thia Ircumstance as an evidence against the veracity of the Mosaic narrative, on ae ground that it is altogether unlikely that the Egyptian princess who estowed the name (see Exod. ii. IG) w .a acquainted with Hebrew. Quite Sght, but supposing the lexicographers have given a wrong derivation, and bat the name is not of Hebrew origin at all, but is the Egyptian Messou or poptie Mo-ushe, i. e., drawn out of the water, I think, it must then be admitted, ftther to argue in favour of the truthfulness of the Mosaic narrative. ^. ^ >^^ 0», -^ IMAGE EVALUATION TEST TARGET (MT-3) 1.0 I.I 11.25 li£|M 12.5 lAo iyi|2.o Mill U 116 6" Hiotographic Sciences Corporation 23 WIST MAIN STREET WEBSTER, N.Y. USSO (7)6) 873-4503 ■^^ . -& xeii. INTBODUCmON. ^ may be^thered the following statements regarding the Israel- ites : " "Hiere was a king of ours," sajrs Manetho, " whose name was Timans ; under whom it came to pass, I know not how, that God was averse to us, and there came, after a surprising manner, men of ignoble birth out of the Eastern parts, and had boldness enough to make an expedition into our country, and with ease subdued it by force, yet without our hazarding a battle with them/' Here the reader will at once perceive an allusion to the Israelites coming into Egypt. As to the plagues, Manetho is silent but goes on to say : " ^t length they made one of themselves king, whose name was Salates ; he also lived at Memphis, and made both the Upper and Lower regions pay tribute." This no doubt refers to Joseph. A little further on, Manetho says : " That the shepherds built a wall round all this place, which was a large and strong wall ; and this in order to keep all their posse-ssions and their prey within a place of strength." The building of the wall in this passage, disguised as it is, evidently refers to the " treasure cities, Pithom and Barn- eses," which the Israelites had to build or fortify for Phnraoh; (see Exod. ii. 11), although Manetho wants to make it appear that the Israelites built the wall to fortify themselves. How- ever, he goes on to say, " that Thumosis, the son of Alisphrag- muthosis, made an attempt to take them by force and by seige, with four hundred and eighty thousand men to lie round about them ; but that upon his despairing of taking the place by seige, they came to a composition with them, that they should leave Egyj.!;, and go without any harm being done to them whithersoever they would ; and that after the composition was made, they went away with their whole families and affects; not fewer in number than two hundred and forty thousand, and took their journey from Egypt, through the wilderness, for Syria ; but that as they weie in ^ear of the Assyiians, who had then the dominion over Asia, they built a city in the country which is now called Judea, and that large enough to contain this great number of men, and called it Jerusalem." We cannot help but admire the ingenuity which Manetho displays in his narrative, in getting over a very humiliating portion of history regarding his native counti'y, and we venture to say very few modem war reporters could have surpassed him in this respect There are two circumstances, however, which seem very strange. In the first place, that a great nation should allow itself to hd conquered even without "hazarding a battle," by " men of ignoble birth," whose numbers could not have been large, or the historian would certainly not have omitted giving it, for it is no disgrace to be overpowered by a superior force. Secondly, that "four hundred and eighty thousand" Egyptian warriors should have been unable to INTBODUCnON. XCUl. conquer a people of juat half that number, including women and children. We are compelled here to call in question the veracity of the Egyptian "sacred records," from which Manetho professes to have drawn his information, for the conduct of the Egyptian soldiers in after times, certainly bespeaks for them anything but cowai-dice. In another book m speaking of the people that had taken possession of Egypt, Manetho gays: "This nation, thus called shepherds, were also called captives in their sacred books." This agrees perfectly with Qene-sis xlvii. 3, when Pharaoh asked Joseph's brethren, "What is your occupt.> 'lOn ?" They answered, " Thy servants are shepherds, both we, and also our fathers." (The reader may consult for more particulars, Josephus against Apion. B. I.) We may mention here also, that among other pictorial repre- sentations found at fieni Hassan, a very large village on the east bank of the Nile, there is depicted on a tomb a scene of the arrival of some foreigners, which by many acute writers has been looked upon as refening to the arrival of Jacob's family in Egypt. They carry all their goods up ot sTifficient space to intro- duce all the human figures, as the aniniak take up a good deal of space, or perhaps that it was thought quite sutfacieiit lor the purpose merely to give a representation of a portion of the party. The first figure is an Egyptian scribe, who apparently presents an account of their arrival to a pei-son in a sitting posture, the owner of the tomb, and one of the principal officers of Pharaoh. The next figure, is likewise an Egyptian, who ushers them into his [)resence. Two strangers advance bringing presents, the wild goat and the gazelle, probably as productions of their country. Four men with hiowt^jand clubs follow, lead- ing an ass, on which there are two children in panniers, accompanied by a boy and four women, then comes another ass laden and two men, one of whom carrieH a bow and a club, and the other a lyre, which he p'avs, with the plectrum. According to the prevailing custom in the Ea^st at that peiiod all the men have beards, which was quite contrary to the custom then prevailing in Egyfit, and which at once marks them as foreigners. It has, at one time, been supposed that th^y might have been prisoners taken by the E^ytians during their wars in Asia, but as they are armed, and bringing gifts, and are nlaving on an instrument, this supposition has been abandoned. Wilkinson gives a representation of the scene in his admirable work " Manners and Customs of the Ancient Egyptians," (p. 296 and PUte.) XCIV. INTRODltCnOM. THE MIRACLE OF THE SUN AND MOON STANDING STILL. Of all the miracles recorded in the Old Testament, none has called forth ko much conjecture and adverse criticism as the miracle of the standing still of the sun and moon at the bidding ot Joshua, as recorded in Josh. x. 12, 13, l-t. The passage is unquestiunably a difficult one, and it is therefore not to be wondered at tnab so many diii'erent theories have been put forward by various writers. But whilst I admit that the passage presents some difficulty, I still firmly believe that it can be satisfactorily explained, not only in one but in several ways. Having irequently been asked for my opinion on this subject, I will seize this favourable opportunity of sttiting my views, and also give the principal explanations given by some other writers, to show that even this stupendous event may be vindicated from the charge of the sceptics as involving an impossibility. We learn from the sacred narrative that the inhabitants of Gibeon, on hearing of the wonderful conquests made by Joshua, became greatly alarmed for themselves and their {)owerful city, concludt'd to send ambassadors to the Hebrew eader in the hope of inducing him to make a league with them. As the Gibeonites were descended from the Hivites, the mc.sengers evidently had very little hope of being suc- cessful in their suit ; they, therefore, had recoui-se to stratagem, and pretended as coming from a very distant country, appearing in worn-out clothing, rent shoes, and carrying mouldy bread, which they had brought with them for their provision. These they declared were all new when they set out on their long journey. Their scheme was successful. Joshua made a league with them, and the princes of the congregation confirmed it by an oath. (Josh, ix.) Gibeon being only about five miles distant from Jerusalem, and a very strong and great city, hence when Adoni-zedek, king of the Jatter pLice, heard that the Gibeonites had united with the Hebrews, he hastily sent to the five kings of Canaan to come and assist him in punishing the Gibeonites, and accordingly their combined armies, headed by the kings, went up against the stronghold and encamped before it. The Hebrews, true to the solemn promise they had made, hastened to the assistance of the beleaguered city, God assuring Joshua that he woidd give the enemy into his hand, " there shall not a man stand before thee." (Ch. x. 8.) The Divine assistance here promised forms an introduction to the miracles recorded subsequently, and shows likewise that the united army of the five kings would have been too powerful for the Israelites to affect a ccmplete overthrow unaided. The mere putting the enemy to flight by a sudden attack might INTRODUCTION. XCT have, after all, proved only a temporary victory, such as the histories of modem warfare furnish many examples. T? < utter discomfiture of the powerful enemies of Israel in this case could only be brought about by the intervention of God in behalf of His chosen people. Hence we learn from the sacred narrative that when Joshua attacked them at Gibeon, " the LoKD discomfited them before Israel," and us they fled "the Lord cast down great stones from heaven upon them unto Azekah, and they died : they were more which died with hailstones than they whom the children of Israel slew with the Bword." (ch. X. 11.) Some writers have maintained that the " gteat stones," mentioned above, were real atones ; and that the term " hailstones " afterwards was only used to point out the cdeHty of their fall, as well as the great quantity. They refer, in support of their opinion, to the well known fact that stones having fallen in difl*erent parts of the world from the clouds, and that considerable pieces may be seen in the British Museum. But there can be no doubt that the proper inter- pretation of " tnblTl d^Siii " {Avanim gedoloth) " great stones'" is hailstones, lor the sacred writers frequently employs first a general term or figure, and immediately afterwards, for the sake of perspicuity, explain it. Besides, the seventh Egyptian plague furnishes another instance where God employed hail- stones as an agent to destroy both men and cattle. (Exod. ix. 25.) In Isaiah xxviii. 2, God's judgments are likened to a hailstorm. And here, we may remark also, that the language employed by the sacred writer, " and the Lord cast down great stones from heaven," is neither exaggerated nor inappropriate, for it is well known that in hot climates hail-stones have frequently fallen of enormous size. In British India hail-stones of con- siderable size have been known to remain on the ground for several daj's in the hottest season. In January, 1860, one of Her Majesty's ships, off the Cape, received serious injury by a fall of ice-masses which were of the size of half bricks. It is even reported that in tropical countries they have been seen as lari^e as a sheep. Commodore Porter in his " Lettejs from Constantinople and its environs," (vol. i. p. 44) gives the follow- ing graphic account of a hail-storm which overtook him whilst in a boat on the Bosphorus in the year 1831: " We had got perhaps a mile and a half on our way, when a cloud rising in the west gave indications of an approaching rain. In a few minutes we discovered something falling from the heavens with a heavy splash, and of a whitish appearance. I could not conceive what it was, but observing some gulls near, I supposed it to be them darting after fish, but soon after discovered that they were large balls of ice falling. Immedi- zevL IMTKODUCnON. ately we beard a sound like rumbling tbunder, or ten thousand carriages rolling furiously over the pavement. The whole Bosphorus was in a foam, as though heaven's artillery had been dischargei^. upon us and our frail machine. Our fate seemed inevitable, our umbrellas were raised to r^rotect us ; the lumps of ice stvipped them into riblions. We fortunately had a bullock's hide with us, under which we crawled and which saved us from further injury. One man of the three oarsmen had his hand literally smashed, another man injured in the shoulder ; Mr. H. received a severe blow in the leg ; my right hand was somewhat disabled, and all were more or less injured. A smaller kaick accompanied, with my two servants. They were both disabled, and are now in bed with their wounds ; the kaick was terribly bruised. It was the most awful and terrific scene that I ever witnessed, and God forbid that I should be ever exposed to such another. Balls of ice as large as my two fists fell into the boat, and some of them came with such \ iolence as certainly to have broken an arm or leg, had they struck us in these parts. One of them struck the blade of an oar and split it. The scene lasted may be five minutes ; but> it was five minutes of the most awful feeling that 1 ever experienced." A little further on he remarks, " I have been in oction, and seen death and destruction around me in every shape of horror ; but I never before had such a feeling of awe which seized upon me as on this occasion, and still haunts me ♦ * My porter; the boldest of my family, who had ventured an instant from the door, had been knocked down by a hailstone, and had they not dragged him in by the heels, would have been battered to death. * * Two boatsmen were killed in the upper part of the village, and I have heard of liroken bones in abundance. Many of the thick brick tiles with which my roof is covered are smashed to atoms. It is imposKible to convey an idea of what it waa Imagine to yoiirseU', however, the heavens suddenly froze over, and so suddenly broke to pieces in irregular masses of from half a pound to a pound in >« eight, and precipitated to the earth." It will thuii be seen that the hailstorm in the miracle under con:4iJeration, as well as that in the seventh plague of Egypt, 8tanernatural presents generally in the Scriptures, no violent opposition to the natural, but rather unites in a friendly allianco with it." The miracle in both cases consisted chiefly in their having been more severe than ordinary hailstorms, and their having occuired for cei-tain purposes. As another example of thi.s kind, we may mention the miraculous provision of quails recorded in Exod. xvi. 12, 13, Num. xi. 13, 32. Now nfTRODUCnOK. zevii. large flights of quails are annually observed to visit the islands of Malta, Sicily, the kingdom of Naples, and sometimes the peninsula of Sinai, yet on that occasion the miracle consisted alHO in their being brought for a certain purpose, and their coming in an unusual large number. But although a great number of the enemy were killed by the hailstones, a large number apparently had remained unharmed, and it was then that Joshua in the heat of pursuit uttered the memorable words : " San be thoa still on Qibeon, And thoa moon in the vklley of Ajalon." " And the sun was still, and the moon stayed, until the peo- ple had avenged themselves upou their enemies. Is not this written in the Book of Jasher ? So the sun stood still in the midst of heaven, and hastened not to go down as if it were a whole day." In explaining the above passage, we must preface our remarks by stating, that whenever the mind of the ancient Hebrew, for some reason or other, became excited above the ordinary tone of feeling, his language at once became dignified, animated, and figurative. Thb in reality forms the chief characteristic of Hebrew poetry, and will at once explain why so much of the Old Testament is written in *poetry, and why we here and there meet with brief poetic passages dispersed among the prose writing. Thus we find already in Qen. iv. 23-24, the address of Lamech to his wives couched in such poetic lan- guage : *' Adah and Zillah, hear my voice. Wives of Lamech, give ear to my epeeoh, If I have alain a man to my woanding, And a youns man to my hurt ; If Cain shaU be avenged seven times. Then Lamech seventy times seven, "t The malediction pronounced by Noah against the descen- dants of Ham, (Oen. ix. 25, 2G, 27,) — the prophetic address of Jacob to his sons, (Gen. xlix, 3, 27,) — Balaam's parables, or rather prophecies, (Num. xxiii. xxiv.,) — the last address of Moses to the assembled Israelites, (Deut. xxxiii.,) and other passages occurring among the prose writings, are likewise couched in high poetic language. It must also be borne in mind that the lofty thoughts of the sacred bards, and the sub- lime figures employed by them, often widely difier in their * The unaraoteristic of Hebrew poetry will hereafter be fally explained, M that even the English reader withoat any knowledge of Hebrew will be able to distiugnish the poetical passages from the mere prose writing. t This passage will hereafter be explained in the Commentary. xeviii. IRTKODUCnON. character from those employed by secular poet" and, therefore, in explaining them it is necessary to view them from a scrip- tural stand point Having made thes'j preliminary remarks — which I beg the reader to bear in mind — we may return to the passage under consideration. It is evident from the context, that although many of the Canaanites bad fallen by toe sword, and still more had been killed by the hail-storm, that yet a vast number had remained unharmed and were endeavouring to escape into their " fenced citiea" It was then, that whilst in hot pursuit of the enemy, and in the anxiety of rendering the victory complete, that Joshua longed for a prclons^g of day-light Under such cir* cumstances, we can readily imagine that the mind of the Hebrew leader wonld be raided far above the ordinary tone of feeling, and thus it was that he expressed his ardent desire in the highly figurative language which has been so terribly mis- interpreted by many writers and lecturers. And yet the Old Testament contains many other equally lofty poetic figures which not only have given no offence, but have even been greatly admired by these adverse critica But it will be said that the text distinctly states : "And the sun stood still, and the moon stayed, until the people had avenged themselves upon their enemies." And again : " So the sun stood still in the midst of heaven, and hastened not to go down as if it were a whole day." I have already stated that the language of the Old Testament writings is very elliptical, and I consider that the paa^age may properly be rendered, " Ajn*-^X^ ^^ solstice." (Frag. 154.) '^fll'^ Many eminent commentators, and among them Dr. Adam • ' * Clark, conjecture that the miracle may have been affected by J^'i^^^^i^ h a temporary cessation of the diurnal motion of the earth, the ^ ^ 'vvA^ annual being still continued. They very properly maintain^ 'W'v>^'^\>*u^ that this was possible to Omnipotence, and that such a cessation p. * r^ might have taken place without occasioning the slightest o^^^*'^''"'''''*^''^ disturbance in the motion of any others of the planetory ^^*5^c.«-vCtC<^ system. That it is vain to cry out and say, " such a cessation . ^ ' of motion in one planet could not take place without disorder- 4jj ^ /'^^ ing the motion of all the rest;" that those who make such an i^ . it assertion '* neither know the Scripture nor the power of God." '3r^W> -f M^ How forcibly does the question which God addressed to Job /,> ' _k /^ come home to such persons : / At 0\£SikXif^ " Who u this that darkeneth coaniel by words Without knowledge T — (Job. xxxviii. 2.) —S 0 ^ N^ ' But the objectors likewise find fault with the language '^'^ ^ , employed. They say, Joshua, as an inspired writer, should L -^vvw^ v^Vv I have had a correct philosophical notion of the true system of ' . ^a. ' the universe, and have known that the solar influence was the fc^^v^a^ T^^ cause of the earth's rotation. In reply, it has been maintained^ q - ~Ai^ by some writers that the language is perfectly consistent with'-'-^* *-•* ^ ^ the strictest astronomical knowledge: that the verb cm {dom) c^^ '•jh"] |is here not to be taken in its secondary signification, stand ''^ ^^ crw y-i 11 1 : at III .}i §. IKTRODUCnOll. itiU; but iu its primary, he ttill, i. €., no longer act upon the earth to cause it to revolve round its axis. In all fairness, I must say, this argument docs not hold good, for in verse 13 it is distinctly steted, "TDTa^n n725'»T" (waiyadmoth hash- §hemeah) "and the sun stood siill," " K^^b "^fi^ Kbl " (welo atz lavoh) "and did not hasten to go down." The true explanation rather is, that Joshua, like the other sacred writers, adapts his language to the ordinary comprehension of the people. Had he said, "Elarth stand thou still," his countrymen would, no doubt, have looked at him in astonishment, and woniered what he meant by using such meaningless language. The Hebrews, in common with other ancient nations, believed the sun revolved round the earth, for they saw him rise in the east, and set in the west.* It is simply absurd to argue from the poetic language used by Joshua, bidding the sun and moon to stand still, that he, consequently, knew no better; for it might with equal force be argued that Sir Isaac Newton, and other philosophers and astronomers, knew no better, since they coniitantly used the phrases — the moon rises, the sun sets. There was, however, a special propriety in the words made use of by Joshua which has not been generally taken into con- sideration. The Canaanites worshipped the suu and moon under the names of Baal and Ashtaroth. Joshua, therefore, in calling on these luminaries to assist in extirpating this corrupt race, would serve to convince the Israelites, who were only too prone to fall into idolatry, of the folly of trusting in idols who, at the bidding of Jehovah, must aid in the destruction of their votaries. Joshua, in the passage we are considering, appeals to the Book of Jasher : " is not this written in the Book of Jasher ?" In like manner David appealed to this Book (2 Sam. i. 18) as containing the elegy which he had composed on the death of Saul and Jonathan. These being the only two places where the book is mentioned, there has been not a little conjecture as to its authorship, character, and contents. The book is in Hebrew, called "itiTI "IBD {sepher hai-yaaher,) i. e., " The Booh of the Upright," and the Tahnudic and some later Hebrew writers have supposed it to be merely another name for the * It waa P^thagoraa (bom about 570 B. C. ) who apparently firat had con- ceived the notion of the sun being at rest and the heavenly oodiea revolving round him. He regarded the Universe as consisting of ten heavenly bodiea revolvinff round a central tire, the hearth, or altar, of the Univen»e. Hii •ystem, however, gradually died out, and was lost sight of until Copemicoi (bom 1473) again recalled it into existence by directing the attention of philo- sophers to it ; and bavins greatly increased the probability of its troth, by hii oaloulations and powerful Mrgaments, it became ever afterwards known as tiw Copemioaa System. nrrBODUcnoN. ife Book of Genesis, as containing the lives of the patriarchs and other righteous men. Others, again, regard it as identical with' the Books of Moses. These two suppositions are obviously untenable, for the two quotations above refeired to, could not possibly have occurred in them. By far the more reasonable supposition is, th«t it was customary amons the Hebrews, as among other nations, to celebrate the warlike deeds of the national heroes in poems or songs, and that this book contained those national poems and ballads, and probably, also, poems in praise of other celebrated and pious men. And hence its name : Book of the Upright. This will, at the same time, account for its name in the Pshito (the Syriac version), where it is called Sepher Hashir, i. e., Tfie Book of Songs, or Hymns. QrotiuH supposes the book to have been a triumphant song composed purposely to celebrate the victory of Joshua, and the miracle attending it. In that case David's elegy must have been inserted afterwards, which is not likely, if the book had been written merely to celebrate a certain event. Dr. Donaldson, in his recent work — " Jashar," in accordance with the practice of modern criticism of ascribing a later date to the books of the Old Testament, contends that it was wi'itten in the time of Solomon : if so, how could Joshua and David quote it, when only written after their death. But it is one of the aims of modem criticism to make the sacred writers appear as inconsistent as po.ssible. Donaldson's opinion, how- ever, has not been viewed with much favour ; and no wonder, for there is no ground whatever for such a supposition. But not only is this miracle mentioned in the book of Jasher ; it is also alluded to by the prophet Isaiah. ** For as in Mount Peratsim, Jehovah will arise, As in the valley of Gibeon, will He be angry ; To perform His work, His strange work ; To execute His operation. His uncommon operation." — (ch. xxviii. 21.) Later, Habakkuk, in portraying the majesty of God, and His wonderful deeds, also mentions it : "The sun and moon stood still in their habitation." — (ch. iii. 11.) Still later, Sirach speaks of it in the apocryphal book, £cclesiasticus : " Did not the sun go back by His means ? and was not the day as long as two . — (ch. xlvi. 4.) Later again, we find the Jewish historian, Josephus, speaks of it as follows : " Moreover, it happened that the day was lengthened, that the night might not come on too soon, and be an obstruction to the zeal of the Hebrews in pursuing their enemies." And further on he says : " Now, that the day was lengthened at this time, and was longer than ordinary, ia^ IS dL INTRODUCTION. i . Iv. expressed in the books laid up ia the tempU." (Ant. B. v. ch. 1, § 17.) Here ve have a chain of Hebrew witnesses, living at long intervals of time from one another, bearing testimony to the miracle having been iierformed. It is also worthy of notice here, that Herodotus, the oldest of the Greek historians, speaks of a tradition among the Egyptian priests, that in very remote times the sun had four times departed from his regular course, having twice net where he ought to have risen, and twice risen where he ought to have set. (Herod. Euterpe, § 142.) Some of the most eminent German critics regard this singular tradition to have reference to this miracle, and the miracle vouchsafed to Hezekiah, when the shadow on the dial went ten degrees backward.* — (2 Kings, XX. 11.) THE CONQUEST OF CANAAN. Before dismissing this subject, I may seize this opportunity to offer a few remarks in reply to objections made in regard to the conquest of Canaan, ancl the treatment to which its inhabi- tants were subjected by the Israelites. This has been a favorite theme with the opponents of Holy Writ, with which they endeavoured to work on the tender feeling of their readers or hearers ; and I will be charitable, and suppose that the language employed in some cases was merely used for rhetorical effect. It is somewhat astonishing to see such men as Dr. Kuenen, Dr. Hooykas, Dr. Oort, and some other well known writers, take such a one-sided view of this subject : looking merely at the punishment, without first inquiring whether that punishment was not well merited. If we trace the history of the Canaanites, we will find that, from a very early period, their morals were most deeply depraved, and their character marked by the commission of th« inost enormous crimes. Let the reader turn to Genesis xviii., xix., and read the account of what led to the destruction of Sodom and the three neighbouring cities, Gomorrha, Zeboim, and Admah, and it will give him an insight into the utter depravity of the Canaanites. Not even the sons-in-law of Lot would listen to the voice of warning. Such a fearful punish- ment as that with which those cities were visited, one would have supposed, could not have failed to strike terror and * The miraculoas sign given to Hezekiah, as might be expected, has siven rise to various conjectures as to the means by which the retrogation o? the •hadow on the dial had been produced. The opinion, however, which found the most favour is, that the solar raya were deflected in a peculiar manner by tome means to bring (Ufout the change, withotU supposing ih» airOi to have turned bach upon its own axis. INTRODUCTION. ciiL exercise a beneficial influence on this wicked race, arousing them to the danger of persevering in their evil deeds. But wickedness ever deafens the ears and blinds the eyes ; and the Canaanites, whilst gazing on the limpid but nauseous waters of the dead sea, would nut consider that "There deeply engulfed lies aapiring Gomorrah, Whoae Bins have i>uia<)iie * I . i i oxvi. IKTRODUOnON. that man is a stubborn creature. Let him once have formed an opinion on a subject, or tiiken a dislike against anything, all the most consistent reasoning will frequently prove of no avail to convince him of his errors. This stubbornness has been the cause of many a man's ruin. But the real source from which a great deal of this prejudice takes its rise, is no doubt to be found in the fnct that the Bible professes to be the inspired Word of Qod, and containing the Divine laws and precepts by which the life of the true worshippers of Jehovah must be regulated. These precepts, however, do not always coincide with the notions of right and wrong, as entertained by some persons, or do not exactly chime in with their views on religious obligations, and thus we can easily understand how prejudice may be engenuored against a teaching that tends to circumscribe the liberty of free thought, BO highly prized by some men. And this will also account for why the first attacks that were made against Scripture, were dii'octed against the Pentateuch. In order to shake the Divine authority of the Mosaic laws, it was necessary to impugn the historic truth of the Mosaic records, and hence it is, that upon this point the whole force of the rationalistic school is con- centrated. Celsus, an Epicurean philosopher, who lived in the second century of the Christian era — affords a striking illustra- tion of the above remarks. He was the first who ever expressed doubts as to the genuineness of the books of Moses. (See Origen, Cont. Celsus iv. 42.) But there is not much difficulty in finding the rea.son for his doing so. He held views which were entirely opposed to the terxhing of the Pentateuch. Thus, for example, he maintained, that evil was necessary and etei'nal, aa an eBsent'ial property of the material world, and that sin can never be entirely removed, and certaiidy not by sacrifice. The reader will perceive Celsus had no other alter- native, but to relinguish his views, or to deny the authenticity of the Pentateuch. As another illustration of the same kind, we may mention Ptolomy — a *Valentinian gnostic, who lived in the third century — who also expressed doubts as to the genuineness of the books of Moses, but it would really be diflScult to say, what some of those Gnostics believed, or did not believe. The Valentini.an sch(^ol founded by Valentinus, to which Ptolomy belonged, especially held some outrageous doctiines. I have on purpose alluded to these two ancient * The term Gnostic is derived from the Greek word gnuais, •.«., knowledge. The Gnostics were a number of early Christian sects, holding different doctrines or views. They are generally spoken of by the names of their respective founders. The religious opinions of some of those sects were exceedingly mdiculous, whilst the practices of others were even highly immoral. No wonder that both Jews and Christians were unremitting in tbeur warfare against them. INTRODUCTION. CXVll. writers, because they are generally paraded by modem nceptical winters to show that doubts as to the genuineness of the Penta- teuch were already expressed in the second and third centurieti ; they are, however, very reticent in saying anything about the character of their doctrines ; and I have, therefore, thought it proper to draw attention to it. These two are the only ancient writers that the most diligent research could discover, who questioned the authenti- city of the books of Moses. Had there been any others, they would not have been omitted from the list of authorities which De Wette gives in his " Critical and Historical Introduction to the Canonical Scriptures of the Old Testament." (See Vol. II pp. ICl, 102, second edition, Boston.) He is too faithful a disciple of Spinoza — who may be called the father of ration- alism— to have ovorlooked any writer of antiquity whose opinion might be appealed to, for ho evidently felt that ancient authorities would materially strengthen the position of the new cnticisni. But these are not to be found, for one would, indeed, in vain search even for a hint against the genuineness of the Pentateuch in the voluminous writings of the ancient Jewish or Christian fathers. It is, in fact, admitted, even by the most pronounced sceptical writers of modern times, that it was Spinoza who flourished in the 17th centuiy, that firet brought forward most of the modern arguments against the genuineness of the books of Moses ; and it is by no means difficult to discover the causes, that gradually induced him to swerve from the religious principles which had been implanted in his youth by his faithful and eminent teacher. Rabbi Saul Levi Moi'teira. His father, an opulent Portuguese Hebrew, discovering that already, at a very early age the youth gave indications of being endowed with uncommon abilities, had him diligently instructed in the Hebrew Scriptures, the Talmud, and the commentaries of the most celebrated Rabbles. It is said that already, at the age of fifteen years, he astonished the learned with his wonderful proficiency in Talmudical learning. After- wards he studied Greek and Latin under Van den Ende, who taught at Amsterdam, and who is said to have entertained but very loose principles on religious matters, and it is supposed that it was from him that Spinoza first imbibed some of his sceptical notions. This teacher, who was also an eminent physician, had a highly educated daughter, who took the place of her father in the teacher's chair whenever he was called away on professional duties. With this lady Spinoza fell desperately in love, but was rejected ; and from that time gave himself entirely up to the study of philosophy. In this field of learning the sceptical doubts, which had been aroused in him by his former Greek teacher, ^gradually developed them- 18 •iS ^1 i fi m ir inr I'H n h.f hi CXVUl. INTRODUCTION. 1,1 t selves more and more, which led him by degrees to withdraw himself from the religious observances of his brethren. He was afterwards, on his openly uttering his rank heresies, formally excommunicated. Here, then, we have really the commencement of modern doubt. As we have already stated, Spinoza was an efficient student of the Bible already at the age of fifteen, yet he had never discovered any discrepancies in it until after he had adopted his peculiar philosophical system. With this system he became so fascinated that everything else had to accommodate itself to its propositions. But the Penta- teuch teaches quite opposite to what Spinoza teaches. The very first verse clashes with his system. God is there set forth as the Creator of the Universe, but Spinoza's god neither thinks nor creates. According to him, there is no real difierence between mind as represented by God, and matter as reprebented by nature. They are, and may be called either god or nature according to the light under which they are viewed. Being fully impressed with these views, he was no longer an impar- tial critic of Scripture. He criticised the sacred narratives now from his new stand-point, and declared them inconsistent. Inconsistent, therefore, only with his newly assumed view, but not inconsistent with the views of thousands of learned men, yes, and among them numerous eminent philosophers, that had devoted their whole lives to the study of the Bible. We will hereafter, in the literary history of the Hebrews, notice Bibli- cal scholars who were at the same time profound philosophers, whose names stood by general consent far higher in scholarship than Spinoza can lay claim to ! Spinoza was evidently indis- solubly wedded to his opinions. Although he greatly admired the reasonings and conclusions of *Descarte3, yet he allowed himself only to be influenced by his arguments, so long as they in no way interfered with his own mode of thinking. Had he been less opinionative, he would have hardly rejected the clear and distinct reasoning of Descartes concerning the existence of God as the absolutely Perfect Being, and the immortality of the soul. Boyle, in his " Thoughts upon Comets," says, " Spinoza was the greatest atheist that ever lived ; and he * Rene Descartes, (sometimes callbJ Renatns Cartesius), was bom March SI, 1696, at la Haye, in Touraine. At the request of Queen Christina of Sweden, he came to Stockholm, in October, 1649. Her Majesty engaged him to attend her every morning at 5 o'clock to instruct her in his philosophy. The Queen, however, did not long enjoy his instructions, for he died a few months after his arrival at the cou"t, on February 11th, 1660. He was interred at Stock- holm ; but seventeen years afterwards his remains were removed to Paris, where they are buried in the church of Oenevieve-du-Mont, where a magnifi- cent monument marks his resting place. The most recent edition of the pnilo- sophical and mathematical works of Descartes has been published by M. Cousin, 11 volumes, Paris, 1824-1826. INTRODUCTION. CXIX. grew 80 fond of certain philosophical principles that, the better to meditate upon them, he confined himself to a close retire- ment, denouncing all the pleasures and vanities of the world, and minding nothing but those obstruse meditations." Spinoza was born at Amsterdam, on the 21th of November, 1633, and died of consumption when only 44 years old in February, 1677. He is spoken of as having been an exceedingly kind-hearted person, and preferring to live a life of abstemiousness rather than excepting the generous offers made to him by some wealthy friends. All he could be prevailed upon was, to accept a small annuity of a few florins. It is also said, that he rejected with scorn an offer of a pension made to him by Louis XIV. on condition that he would dedicate one of his works to him. There is a German translation of Spinoza's collected Works by B. Auerbach, in five volumes. Stuttgard, 1841, and, I believe, an English translation, by J. H. Lewes. Spinoza, in order to strengthen his own views, that the books of Moses owe their present form to the labours of Ezra, refers to the eminent Biblical scholar and philosopher Rabbi Aben Ezra, who flourished in the 12th century, as having expressed a doubt as to the genuineness of those books. Now, I do not, for one moment, suppose that Spinoza wilfully misiepre- sented the learned Rabbi, but he certainly misunderstood him. The most prominent disciple of the advanced school of criticism will admit that Aben Ezra never wrote a word that could possibly be construed cjs expressing such a doubt, all he said was, that there inay he a few interpolations, such as I have already spoken of. He even took Isaac ben Jasos, a Spanish Hebrew, severely to task for having gone too far in this direction. As it is generally the case, a new theory requires only to be fairly set on foot, and, no matter however extravagant, it is sure to enlist some admirers. A striking example of this we had not many years ago, in the famous table-rapping and spirit manifestations. 1, myself, have known religious and highly educated ladies and gentlemen having become full believers in those absurdities. And so it was with Spinoza's theory. It soon found followers who either adopted it altogether, or in a modified form. Rich. Simon thinks that " The Pentateuch was written by different men at various times." {Hist. cit. du V. T. 1078.) Leclerc most absurd'y refeis its origin, or the most of it, to the priest sent by the King of Assyria to teach the new Gentile settlers who had lately been transplanted by him in the cities of Samaiia. (See II Kings, xvii. 24-28.) Sentimens de quelques Theologiens de Bollande, &c., letter vi., 1689.) In the beginning of this century Vater entered more fully into the discussion of the authorship of tho Pentateuch in a "Treatise on M cxx. INTRODUCrriON. Moses and the author of the Pentateuch," in his Commentary, volume III., p. 393 sq., 1805. Since then there have been a number of writers who, in some form or other, have denied the genuineness of the Pentateuch. Of these we shall only mention L)e VVette, Gesenius, Hnrtmann, Von Bohlen, Tuch, and Bertholdt. 1 have already stated that among the many voluminous Jewish and Chiistian writers, up to the time of Spinoza, there is none that ever expressed a doubt as to the genuineness of the books of Moses. In modern times, we have likewise a powerful array of defenders. Among them are found the following eminent writers. Michaelis, Introduction; Jahn, Introduc- tion, Vol. 11, which the reader will find a mastsrly defence. Hasse, in his Endeckungen, &c., 1805 ; Griesinger, on the Pentateuch, 1806; Ch. A. Fritzsche, Priifung der Oriinde, mit welchen neuerlich die Aechtheit der Biicher Moais beatritten worden ist, 1814, i- •?•, examination of grounds which have lately been adduced in contesting the genuineness of the books of Moses. Rosenmliller, Schol. in Pentateuchuvi ; Hengsten- berg, Beitr&ge zur Elnleitung in A. T., oderdie Authentic d. Pent, ervnesen, 1836-1839. The reader may also refer to his Christology of the 0. T., translated by Reuel ; Keith ; Graves, Lectures on the Four last books of the Pentateuch ; Hartwell Home ; Laborde, Gommentaire sur VExode et les Nombrea, &g., Paris, folio, 1842. And so a great many other authors might be given. In concluding these introductory remarks which have assumed somewhat larger dimensions than was first intended, it may not be out of place to offer a few observations in regard to the plan which has been adopted in the construction of the Commentary. And first, the translations are directly made from the original Hebrew ; but, as I have already stated, the rendering of the English version is in all cases retained, where it is not at variance with the original text. An old friend is always more highly prized than a new one, and, therefore, it is only in such places where the authorized version has failed to convey the real sense of the original that another rendering has been adopted, but the reader will find the grounds for doing so always explained in the Commentary. Secondly, with respect to the Commentary, the author must confess, that it was not a very easy matter to arrive at a definite conclusion, as to what plan he should adopt. He felt, to give merely explanatory notes, excluding entirely the critical element, would hardly come up to the requirements of the present age, in which Biblical criticism is conducted upon principles, equally scientific as the investigations in other branches of learning. A great many of the publications now in ciiculation, INTRODUCTION. CXXl, have ended, ons in ruction iiectly stated, tained, An old e, and, version tuother rounds 31' must ^e at a Le felt, I critical Ipresent Inciples, Iches of lulation, tending either directly or indirectly to undennine the authen- ticitj' of the sacred Scriptures are of a highly critical character ; and I think it will be readily conceded, that the only legitimate and satisfactory way of meeting the arguments of the opponents of Scripture is, by a thorough critical refutation. A mere denial of any statement can have but little weight, especially if that statement ivS also sustained by arguments. The origin of the Aurora Borealis, for example, is as yet merely a matter of conjecture. The most common hypothesis is, that it is an electrical phenomenon, and the advocates of this supposition bring forward certain arguments in support of it. Now it would certainly not be sufficient for any one holding a different opinion, merely denying the correctness of the common hypothesis, he would be expected to bring forward some tan- gible arguments in support of his own theorj'. And the same holds good in regard to contested passages of the Bible. Sound arguments, and nothing else, will answer. Another consideration which has forced itself strongly upon iny mind is, that although the study of the Hebrew language has of late years been far more attended to than foimerly, still the time generallj'^ do voted to it is so very limited as to preclude the possibility of mastering the intricacies of that ancient language in that short time, and, therefore, a critical commen- tary would necessarily afford great assistance in the study of the Old Testament. Impressed with these considerations, I have determined to make the Commentary strictl}' critical ; but, in loiiig S'>, I have not lost sight of the fact, that a commentary is a useful aid to Biblical reading in families, and I have accordingly arranged the notes, so as to be perfectly intelligible and suitable to every class of readers. The Bible being an eastern book, many of the most sublime figures are drawn from the customs, manners, rites, and ceremonies of the ancient Hebrews and other Oriental nations ; and in explaining these, the works of the best eastern travellers have been consulted. There is also a description given of the countries, towns, rivers,, mountains, plants and animals, an acquaintance with which is of the utmost importance to the perfect understanding of the sacred writers, as well as to enable the reader to appreciate and fully to enjoy the beauties of their sublime and lofty concep- tions. In tieating on those portions of Scripture which are assailed, I have frequently made the heathen writers and the monumental inscriptions of antiquity to testify to the truth of the sacred records. But while the authenticity of the Old Testament books will be strenuously defended, I have taken special care to avoid touching upon any doctrinal points. My sole aim has been to give a true rendering and plain interpreta>^ . tion of those passages that require elucidation, and not to 19 ay- 1' i i I 'n flint Kk i jfT CXXII. INTBODUCTION. i y I >*■ meddle with any denominational questions. No labour ha« however, been spared in order to render the work in eveiy respect useful and interesting ; but how far I have suc- ceeded in this endeavour, remains for the reader to decide. In a work of this kind it can hardly be hoped to give general satisfaction, it is in most cases almost a hopeless task to please everybody, but whatever the public verdict may be, the author has at least the satisfaction of knowing that his whole endeavours have been to perform the task to the best of his abilities, and with the strictest impartiality, never having taken merely a one-sided view of any subject, but always carefully weighing the arguments that may be urged against, as well as those that may be brought in support of any subject. As the author had frequently to allude to, and make quotations from Hebrew vmtings, he thought it best to commence the Commen- tary with a complete history of the literature of the Hebrews, from the earliest times. This literary history, the author feels confident, will be found highly interesting and instructive, as an opportunity was thus afforded in tracing the various branches of learning during the Bible periods, and to explain many beautiful and difficult passages of the Old Testament, whilst in the history itself many remarkable incidents from the lives of some of the authors are introduced, which are commonly passed over by writers on this subject. There is, however, another consideration which induced the author to bring this literary history before the American public, and that is, to correct the erroneous ideas which are so largely entertained both as to the extent and character of the Hebrew literature. It is true, since Biblical exegesis has received a larger amount of attention, the names of some of the most eminent Rabbinical writers, and their works have become somewhat more familiarly known. But even those are gener- ally only known as commentators, though many of them excelled also in other branches of learning. Maimonides for example, one of the most eminent of the Rabbles, is generally only known and spoken of as au acute writer on religious and Biblical subjects, although he was likewise a profound philoso- pher, and a highly skilled physician, and this is also the case with many of the other Rabbinical writers. Although the Roman yoke pressed heavily upon the Jewish nation, and the dire calamities consequent upon the siege and the taking of Jerusalem, must have been exceedingly depressing in their effects, yet all those misfortunes apparently did not in the least damp the ardour of the people for education. After the destruction of Jerusalem, seats of learning sprung up in various parts of Palestine and near the Euphrates, and every succeasive century produced men of profound scholarship such INTRODUCTION. exxiu. «B any age and nation mi^hi justly be proud of. Even during the middle ages, when ignorance and superstition reigned supreme among most nations, the literary talent was particu- larly brilliant among the Jews. It is in " the variegated field" of literature so assiduously tended during the by-gone ages by the Hebrew scholars that I ask the reader to take a ramble with me, and I feel satisfied he will at the end not begrudge the time it has cost him. -V gener- them jdes for merally )U8 and jhiloso- Ihe case I Jewish ege and pressing not in After up in every Ip sucn ■^ m vV**. ^f^^S"! ERRATA. FAge iii., lines 14 and IS, from the top, for "gutteral," read gutturaL The above typhographical error was corrected in the copies printed a few days later. Page xvii., 4 lines from the bottom, for "hyperbolilical," read hyperbolical. Page xxvi., 8 lines from the bottom, for "genissen," read geniessen. Page xxxix. and page xcvi., for " Hengsterberg," read Hengstenberg. Page Ixii., 6 lines from the top, for "confidentially," read confidently. Page Ixxvii., 23 lines from the bottom, for "presupposes," read presuppose. Page Ixxx., 21 lines from the bottom, for " Mills," read Mill. Page c, for *' wai-yaamoth," read vai-yaamod ; and for " hai-yasher," read hai-y(i^har. Page ciii., 18 lines from the bottom, for " into hands," read into the handit. Page civ., 21 lines from the bottom, for "respector," read respecter. Page cxii., 4 lines from the bottom, for " distorded," read distwted, 1 line from the bottom, for " possitive," re&A positive. M T HISTORY OF THE LITERATURE OF THE HEBREWS FROM THE EARLIEST TIMES. THE Hebrew language in which all the • books of the Old Testament are written, together with its sister dialects have until of late years generally been designated " Oriental Languages." By this name they are spoken of by Hieronyraous and other early writers. Of late years, however, modem writers have regarded this designation as too comprehensive, as it includes languages which do not belong to this family, and have adopted instead of it, the name Semitic or Shemitic, since according to Genesis x., most of the nations who spoke these dialects were descendants of Shem. This appellation, though more suitable, is by no means altogether appropriate, for it is in some respects hardly comprehensive enough, whilst in other respects it is again too comprehensive. The latter appellation is, however, generally employed by modem writere. The Semitic family of dialects, may be said, to divide itself into three principal branches, namely : The Aramcean, to which belong the Syriac and Chaldee, and which were spoken in Syria, Mesopotamia, and Babylonia. The Hebrew, spoken in Palestine and Phoenicia. The Arabic, of which the Etliiopic constitutes a branch. The Samaritan dialect is merely a mixture of the Hebrew and the Aramaean. As regards the origin of the term Hebrew there are two prevailing opinions. The Hebrew writers generally supposed the term to be a patronimic from the patriarch Eber, the great- grandson of Shem mentioned in Gen. x. 24, 25. But as this patriarch seems not to have been a person of any special notoriety, in fact, w^nly spoken oHn the genealogical account -t^ v! -^-<-WJ c>i d '^Vr^-tZ.^-ir- "^^-' V^ Vo.VtJ^'^ r\^ W«V>-N ~//>Ju >vrt'>^-uOv^»^-c4v^ , tfU. c.ir>Myvvry^ f hJ~ 2 mSTOBT OF HEBBEW LITERATURE. W ! to Abraham, and those that had come with him, from their having passed over the Euphrates on their journey from the East to the hmd of Canaan, where they took up their abode. , This supposition is strongly supported by what we read in Gen. xiv. 13, " And there came one that had escaped, and told Abram^^-^i^n. (ha-ivri), i. «., the passenger, or immigrant. And so it is rendered in the Septuagint : " And told Abram, {rat Trepanj) the pas.senger." The term Hebrew remained after- wards the distinctive name of the Jewish people. Having now shown the origin and antiquity of the appellation Hehreio, we may next proceed to offer a few remarks as to the antiquity of the Hebrew language. In Gen. xi. 1, we read : " And the whole earth was of one lip and one Jei/nd of worda" This is the literal rendering of the pa.<>sage, and is much more to the point than the rendering in our version : " was of one language and one speech," from which it might be inferred that there may have existed differ- ent dialects of that language, which the original altogether precludes. " The whole earth," that is, the inhabitants of the whole earth, or rather of so much as was then populated, ^t is quite a common Hebrew idiom to use the earth for its inhati- tants, and frequently as meaning only a large portion of it. Striking other examples of this idiom, we have Gen. xli. 57 : " And all the earth came into Egypt to Joseph to buy com ; " it is the people of that portion of the earth which was affected by the famine. Freely rendered in our version : " And all the countries." Also, 1 Kings x. 24 : " And all the earth sought Solomon to hear his wisdom." The existence of but* one lan- guage here spoken of, accords with the Scripture teaching that the human ramily sprung from one pair. The question now naturally arises, which was that primitive language ? Now, although the Scriptures do not furnish a direct answer to this question, still there are strong indications which almost estab- lish l^eyond a reasonable doubt that the Hebrew was that language. The question does not in any way affect the authen- ticity of the books of Moses, as it is not for a moment disputed that the Hebrew was the language of the chosen people from * It is worthy of notice here, that among the andent heathen, there existed « belief that not only men, bnt all animals, birds, and even fishes, at one time rke the same langnage ; bnt that numkind, not satisfied with their lot, sent a ^intation to Satnni, desiring immortality, representins that it was not jnit that they should be without a prerogative gpranted by him to serpents, which are yearly renewed by shedding their old skm, and are famished with a new one. Satnm grew venr ai^gnr at this request, and in order to punish their ingratitude, confounded their langnage, which obliged them to disperse over the world. This heathen account of um confusion of the primitive language, disguised as it is, seems, evidentiy, to have been bwrowed from the Mosaic aeoount. HISTORY OP HEBREW LITERATURE. S the time of Abraham ; and that Moses wrote his books in that language, in which it pleased God also to convey His will and commandments, and that therefore the language was in later times also properly called tSllpH "llttb. (lashon hakkadosh) the sacred language ; still considered as a philological question alone, it is worthy of investigation ; and the reader will, I am 8ure, not find it altogether devoid of interest. I will, therefore, state the arguments than can be adduced in favour of the Hebrew, and constitute my readers as the jury to render the verdict. I am not aware that any one ever had the boldness to assert that the proper names in the family of Adam are not purely Hebrew woi-ds. This, the reader may therefore accept as an established fact. Now, those names, as every Bible reader must be aware, are not merely meaningless names, but are on the conti-ary highly significant, in fact, are tnenxorial names, marking certain events. Thus, we find our first parent called Q«]5^, {Adam) ; why ? because he was created Q^nbi* fn^na» (bidmuth Elohim) in the likeness of God — Gen. v. i. Both, the name " Adam," and the Hebrew word for " likeness," are derived from the verb* XVl^l, (damah), to he alike, which is a common Hebrew verb of frequent occurrence. We may here remark also, that the tenn Adam became afterwards the name of the human race in general ; and was according to ch. v. "Z, bestowed by God Himself. " Male and female created He them ; and blessed them, and called their name Adam, (i. e., mankind) in the day when they were created." The name of the mother of the human race, is likewise of Hebrew origin. In Gen. ii. 23, we read, " And Adam said, this is now Done of my bone, and flesh of my flesh : she shall be called nifiift. (ishaha), Woman, because she was taken out of Wfi^, (ish) man." The Hebrew student will at once perceive that the Hebrew word for " Woman," is merely tliQ feminine end- * It is neeeuary here to state that some writers have derived the name Adam ^"^ n73lt^ {^^'l''''*^^) the ground, in reference to Adam being formed from th* dust of the ground. There are, however, two decided objections to this deri- vation. The first is, that in that case the name Adam would be as applicable to "the beast of the field," and "the fowl of the air," for they were also formed from the ground according to Gen. ii. 19, and the name Adam would acconlingly form no distinctive appellation of the human s}Keit». Further, in the account of the creation of man, hit earthly origin is not so much dwelt upon •s his heavenly origin. In Gen. i. 27, where the creation of man is first 8[K)ken of, his earthly origin is not aa much as alluded to. " So God created QlKH {Ifaadam) the man in His image, in the image of God, created He him." Could any language be more explicit ? No less explicit is the statement in chap. v. 1 as above quoted. It is only in chap. ii. 7, where the creation of man is more fully described, that his earthly origin is at all mentioned. Secondly, it is altogether against the genius of the Hebrew language to derive nuucttiine from feminine nouns. In the Hebrew langui^ the masculine nouns are of the simplest form, and from them the corresponding feminine nouns are n I* I" iin i' i *-i HISTOBY OF HEBREW LITERATURE. i^i i/ng added to the masculine word for " Man ;" man-ness, there* fore, if such a word i.<..i3ted in the English language would convey a more precise meaning of the original * By the name niSt^i {ishshah,) Adam evidently intended to convey the close relationship that was to exist between man and wife, for it is immediatelv added : " Therefore shall a man leave his father and his mother, and shall cleave ipW^a, {he- ishto) unto his wife; and they shall be one flesh." The Hebrew word ishahah denotes also loife as well as woman. The passage clearly means that all former existing ties however close, were to yield to the bond of marriage. Even the sacred ties which unites the child to the parents, were to yield to it. What a ditferent view does Scripture present of the sacred state of matrimony, to that which is unfortunately so fre- quently taken of it in modem time.s, looking upon it merely as a civil contract. This scriptural bond of marriage even found a place in the sacred books of the Hindoos and Persians : "The derived by aiding the feminine terminatimi to the maaouline noun, as ^1^ (ith) a man, TMSHi (w/t-«'"^0 a woman. By far the more numerous writen, how- eyer, derive the term h^Jj^ {Adam) from the verb t]*li^ (adam) to be nd or ruddy, in reference to the ruddy or flesh tint of the countenance peculiar to the Caucasian race. Now, although there cannot be the slightest objection to this derivation on philological grounds, still thete is this great objection to it, as the term Adam is a generic term of the human species, hence it would not be an appropriate one to a very large portion of the human family. Indeed, the Chinese hold that man was formed from ytlhw earth, whilst the red Indians to suit their colour, say that he was formed from rtd earth. I have, therefore, adopted the derivation as above given, as being not only more suitable, but likewise also authorized by Scripture itself. In deriving QlK (Adam) from the verb HTSl (damah) the letter J^ must be taken as aformatiiv letter employed sometimes in forming nouns from the verb, as fl jl"l!55 {nrbeh) a locust, from HS"^ (ravah) to multiply, and so many other examples can be adduced. But the reader will perceive, that in either derivation the teim Adam is derived from a Hebrew word. * From the somewhat slightly diflFerent forms of the two Hebrew words, some writers have supposed that HISK {ishsha.) is not the feminine nf S''&( (m/(), but derived from a different root. But there is really not the ghtest ground for such a supposition, for we have other examples of this kind in the Old Testament where these two forms are promiscuously employed even in the same word. Thus in Gen. xxxv. 22, we nave the fomi '©!]ib''B (p'^hF^f^), « concubine, but in 2 Sam. xv. 16, xx. 3, it is written IBHiE (pillegesh.) In 2 Sam. xxiv. 22, we have Q"i5"|J2 (moriygim) threshing drayii or skdges, whilst in 1 Chron, xxi. 23, the same word is written QlU''*!^^ {morigim. ) The close relationship of the two words becomes even more strik- ingly apparent in the plural form of the words, and which also clearly shows that ' ' '. are derived from the verb ©5J5 (wtow/t), to be frail — certainly a most suitable derivation as indicating the frailty of mankind — for we have t3'''0!3i( (ancuhim) men, and CJ'^'QJS {nashim) looman. In the latter the weak letter |j( {akph) being elided to mark the distinction. But as will be seen even the masculine plnrid form is retained with the feminine noun. The plural form rnffllS {ish-shoth) occurs only in Ezek. xxiii. 44, and is evidently of a later introduction. Whilst the plural form P^IS^^ {ishim) occurs only three times, viz : Ph. cxli. i, Prov. viii. 4, and Is. liii. 3, also introduced at a later period. HI8T0BT OF HEBREW LITERATURB. bone of a woman is united with the bone of man, and her flesh with his flesh, as completely as a stream becomes one with the «ea into which it flows." — Abiat. Res. vii. 309, Manu, ix. 22, 45. In order, however, to mark also the close relationship in which his wife stands to the whole human race, he afterwards called her mn» (Ohav-tvafi,) Eve, i. e., life, " because she was the mother of all living : (ch. iii. 20.) It is quite probable that Adam bestowed this name after the birth of his flrst son, although it is mentioned before that event took place. The sacred historian, in recording these facts, evidently did not deem it of importance to notice them always in historical order. Compare for example Gen. x. 25, 31, with what is recorded in ch. xi. But what I particularly wish to draw the reader's attention to is, that the name mn. {Chav-wah,) Eve, which is equivalent to HTl. (Ghai-yah,) is a purely Hebrew word, denoting life. From the names of our first parents, we now pass on to the names of their children, and the.se also will be found strictly Hebrew. According to ch. iv. 1, Eve called her first-born son nip, (Ka-yin,) Cain, that is, a pooaetsion, and assigns the reason why she called him by this name ; " and she said ifii^p, (kanithi,) I have obtained a man from the Lord." * The name was commemorative of the memorable event of the birth of the first child ever born. Here, then, we have again the name derived from a common Hebrew verb. Of course, in a translation the derivations of the names are not apparent. The second son was called bin» (Hevel,) Abel, that is, some- thing transient, a vapour. The sacred writer does not in this case assign any reason why his parents bestowed this name, but we may safely conclude that they were secretly over-ruled to give him this name of prophetic import, in reference to his premature death. We have other instances of this kind in Scripture of names which are apparently of prophetic signifi- cance. Thus for example, ^T>i^, (I-yov), Job, tnat is, one perse- cuted, in reference to his trial and sufterings. Now, the word Hevel is often found in the later writings of the Old Testament ; and, indeed, in Ps. xxxix. 6, (Eng. ver. v. 5,) it is used in reference to the whole human family : " verily every man in his best estate is altogether bSH. (Hevel,) a vapour, (or breath.") The untimely death of Abel must have plunged our firat parents into deep grief, which must have been not a little heightened by the thought that his death was brought about in an unprovoked manner by his own brother. They must now * The different renderings of this passage vill be noticed in the Commentary. 20 1 :' I ' I : m I'm ll ic .,, 0 HISTORY or HEBREW LITKRATl'RE. for the first time, have felt the full force and significance of those awful words : " For in the day that thou eatest thereof thou shalt surely die." Amidst such depressing reflections, and great affliction, we can easily appreciate the heart-felt gratitude which prompted the utterance of Eve at the birth of another son ; " and she called his name Seth, for Qod, said she, hath fiven to me another seed instead of Abel, lor Cain hath slain im." (Gen. iv. 25.) The appropriateness of the name, lies Id the derivation of the Hebrew name which is f|«, (Sheth), and signifies a gift,tLnd is derived from the root JTi'Q5> {f>hith,) to hestow. Here the reader will perceive we have again the name derived from a common Hebrew verb. Seth also must soon have become fully impressed with the misery and sorrow which the disobedience .: his parents had entailed upon the human family, and hence gives expression to the thought which occupit d his mind, by calling his first bom son 1D13J*, {Enoah,) Enos. which signifies /raii, sicfc, aorrmvful, mieeraoU. Afterwards the word was used to denote man, or, collectively, nien. There are but few of the proper names which are mentioned up to the building of the tower of fiabel, of which the derivation cannot now be traced from a Hebrew root. There are a few of which the root has become obsolete, but the same is also the case with words in the later books of the Old Testa- ment, arising from the language having ceased to be a spoken language ; some verbs graaually fell in disuse. We may refer also to the names of Noah and his three sons, as they with their wives, are the only human beings that survived the flood ; and therefore the language which they spoke must have been the one to which the sacred writer alludes, as being the only one existing at the time of the building of the tower of Babel; for there was hardly time for the originating of a new language, considering there was only a period of about 115 years between the flood and the building of the tower. According to Gen. v. 29, Lamesh called his son " Noah," say- ing : " This one shall comfort us concerning our work and toil of our hands, from the ground which the Lord hath cursed." Now, whatever difficulty there may exist in the application of the passage, one thing is certain, that the name nO (No-ach) Noah is a pure Hebrew word signifying rest It occurs, for example, in Esther ix. 16, and in other places. The import of the passages, as we have hinted, is somewhat involved in obscurity, for Scripture nowhere tells us how this prediction was fulfilled in Noah. It has, therefore, given rise to various conjectures. The declaration is unquestionably prophetic. Some have explained it as merely referring to the assistance which Noah would afibrd in the tilling of the ground. But this HISTORY OF HEBREW LITERATURE. r-*^ 1 harvUv furnishM a satisfactory explanation. The language evide'itly refers to some important event. Others, again, have rafened it to the invention of agricultural instrumentn by Noah, through which labour would oe diminished. But Moses nowhere gives Noah credit for such inventions which he would no doubt have done in the same manner as he gave Jubal credit SH being the inventor of musical instruments, and Tubal-oain as p.'x. being the inventor of instruments of brass and iron. (Gen. iv. ' ^^ 21, 22.) Bishop Sherlock sup]>0Hed that the curse inflicted upon j.iiy ■' the earth in consequence of Adam's sin, had as the wickedness upon the earth increased, become more and more severe, so that the toil necessary- in order to obtain sufficient sustenance had giadually become almost an intolerable burden, and he supposed that the words of Lamech refer to a general expecta- tion that through the instrumentality of some distinguished personage, the rigour of the curse was to be greatly abated, and the earth restored again, in a measure, to its primitive fertility and easy mode of cultivation. The Bishop conceived that Lamech, under Divine suggestion, recognized in his new- bom child this personage, and be.stowed upon him a name in accordance with the fact. The prediction thus understood, he maintained, has been verified by the event ; that the earth, from the time of the flood, was in a great degree restored from the curse, and is still enjoying the effect of the blessing bestowed on Noah. Against this supposition of Bishop Sherlock it may be urged that we have not the slightest proof that the agri- cultui-al labour after the flood involved less toil than it did before. Even Solomon, in Ps. cxxvii. 2, which beai's his name, as the author, speaks of eating " bread of sorrows," i. «.. bread procured by toil and pain. And notwithstanding all our modem inventions of agricultural instruments the labour is, and ever will be, still very great, and attended with great anxiety. Now, whatever the true meaning of the passage may be, it must be explained as merely indicating a partial relief from labour, and this is quite in accordance with the common mode of expression prevailing in the east. But where is the partial relief from labour, and the consequent comfort to be found ? Probably the true answer to this question may be discovered by comparing ch. i. 29, with ix. 3. In the former passage, God assigned to men all the produce of the earth for food. This produce, after the fall of our first parents, could only be obtained through hard labour, and attended with constant anxiety. In the latter passacce we have, for the first time, per- mission given for the use of the flesh of animals. " Every moving thing that liveth shall be to you for food, as the green herb I give you all things." The expression " as the green herb," refers to the first allotment in ch. i. 29. Here I think .J i 1 l-l gii SI Ml 1 m \ WK^Bm s HISTORY OF HEBREW LITERATURE. I ' ^1 we have the partial relief; man was to be no longer entirely dependent upon the precarious products of the ground, and which could only be obtained by toil from the curse-laden ground, but, henceforth, was to have more comfort and peace of mind, for in case of failure, he need no longer fear starvation, but may have recourse to the flesh of animals. Hence Kalisch, in his Commentary, has very justly remarked, "We find, there- fore, in the veiy name of Noah an indication of a grand funda- mental change which concerned the whole human family." It was not Laraech's family alone that was to enjoy the relief and comfort granted to Noah, but all future generations were to enjoy it and be benefited by it. This seems to me to be the import of Lamech's words, but as the reader has now the opinions of different interpreters before him, he is able to exer- cise his own judgment. The names of the three sons of Noah are also pure Hebrew words, and were, no doubt, likewise given under the prompting of the spirit of prophecy, for they are also highly significant in their impoi-t. The reader will perceive on perusing ch. v. that in the nine generations from Adam up to Noah only the oldest son is mentioned by name, but in the case of Noah, his three sons are all named, because they became the progenitors of many important nations as recorded in ch. x. Now the name Qo {Saem) is the ordinary Hebrew word for name, but is also used sometimes in the sense of renoun or fame ; as for example Gen. V. 4, " they are mighty men, who were of old men of renoun," but in the original it is " men of name." Noah, evidently, under the prompting of the spirit of prophesy bestowed this name upon his son, for Shem was to be renowned for spiritual blessings. In ch. ix. 26, Noah, after having pronounced a curse upon Canaan, immediately afterwards exclaimed "Bleased be the Lord God of Shem." Jehovah is called the God of Shem, doubtless to iniamate tha'> He was so in a special manner, and as connected with specifll privileges. Accordingly we find that in the line of this father of the chosen race, the knowledge and worship of Jehovah was preserved. This supreme dignity vouchsafed to iShem developed itself gradually more and more, as the chosen people developed into a great nation. The next , \ step we find in the promise made to Abraham, Gen. xvii. 7, "1 will establish my covenant between me and thee and thy seed After thee in their generations for an everlasting covenant to be a God unto thee, and to thy seed after thee." Afterwards, we see God Himself guiding the affairs of His chosen race, and taking up his abode among them. It is only by taking all this into consideration which enables us fully io comprehend the . significance of Noah naming his son " Shem." ^ «J2yV Iv — yf^ CKA. - ^hJI--w~ ^ 1a ^AAfi-y'- - «-^ >• W'AwiK.-vw ^ HISTORY OF HEBREW LITERATURE. » We come next to consider the name of Ham, who is invariably named between his other two brothers, from which we may iDfer, though the time of his birth is nowhere given, that he was second in age ; yet many regard him as the youngest son. The Hebrew name 'Qtl (c'tftwi) denotes heat, horn the root Q^an {chamam) to he or become warm. The name, like that of Shem, is prophetic, for all the decendants of Ham inhabited the tropic zones. Under a slightly modified form it was at a very early period adapted as one of the names of Egypt, and occura on the inscription of the Rosetta Stone under the form of chm^. The Egyptian word signifies tJie black country, so called from the soil of Egypt being generally of that colour. Japheth is always enumerated the last which itself would indi- cate that he was the youngest of the three brothers. But besides this, Shem is, in oh. x. 21, called the eldor brother of Japheth. Notwithstanding this, however, there are many writers who regard Japheth as the eldest. Their opinion is probably based _ upon the authority of the rendering of the above passage in 1 the English vei-sion, which reads, " Unto Shem also, the father <^ '^ of all the children of Eber, the brother of Japheth, the elder, ^ even to him were children born." The original reads, TJfi^ f biTjn flB"» {ci'Chi Jepheth haggadol) and the question arises, ( whether the adjective here agrees with the first substantive, ; and should be translated " the elder brother of Japheth ;" or whether it agrees with the second, and to be rendered, " the brother of Japheth the elder." In the Septuagint, which our ' translators have followed ; the L "^ter rendering is adopted, but ' in the vulgate, the former. It is, aowever, of no use whatever '^ to appeal in such philological points either to the Greek or '. Latin versions : they can only be decided by the usuage of the ' Hebrew language itself. Now, if we examine similar con- structions in the Old Testament, it will be found as a general ^ rule, that when an adjective follows ttvo substantives in a state of construction it agrees with the first noun. In Judges ix. 5, we have precisely the same construction : " Jotham the son of Jerubbaal the youngest," properly rendered in our version, "Jotham the youngest son of Jerubbaal. For other examples, see Hebrew Bible. Deut. xi. 7, Judges i. 13. Having settled this question, we now proceed to the more important point, namely the meaning of the prophetic name Japheth." In Hebrew the name is J^B"' (ycpheth) and is derived ^* \ \ ^«^- from thj root X]^t^(pathah) to spread, to enlarge; and signifies I^Kt>* therefore enlargement or enlarger. The derivation of the name is beautifully brought out, in Noah's prophetic declaration *' regarding Japheth ch. ix. 7, "God will enlarge Japheth,"^*^ which reads in the original fiB'^b nB"* (Yapht leyepheth) literally, "will enlarge the enlarger," where the reader will in; 1 {\J^^/^*^ .?»,.•>"'' u ">•— f-oi,4. ''VO. I ill t i W Ml 10 HISTORY OF HEBREW LITERATURE. perceive there is a pa/ranomaaia or a play upon the two words namely, the verb and the name derived from it This rhetorical, figure is very common in the Hebrew Scriptures, and we shall have occasion to notice some very beautiful ones. The appropriateness of the name " Japheth" becomes strik- ingly apparent, in the remarkable fulfilment of Noah's pro- phetic declaration as set forth in the above quoted passage, Japheth had seven sons whilst Shem had only five, and Ham only four. From his seven sons, the whole of Europe and a considerable part of Asia were originally peopled, and have ever since been occupied by their descendants, some probably also crossed over to America, by Behring's Straits, from Kamschatka. When this wide extent of territory is taken into consideration, it may truly be said of Japheth that he was an enlarger. Now, the names we have noticed which are so highly signifi- cant in Hebrew, are perfectly meaningless in any other language unless one standing in close relation with the Hebrew. Aa an illustration let us take the familiar name John, what is its meaning in English ? Nothing ; it has been adopted from the Greek 'Itaavvt}^. Well, what does it mean in Greek ? Nothing likewise ; it has been derived from the Hebrew, where it occurs under the A^n pmn* (Yehochanan,) and where it is no longer a meaningless word but a compound of {yeho) a part of the sacred name {Jehovah,) and (chanan) is Tnerciful — namely, Jehovah is merciful. The name occurs several times in the Old Testament, and is expressed in the English version — " Johanan." See 1 Chron. v. 36, 36. Eng- lish version, ch, vi. 9, 10, The same is also the case in secular names, as, for example, the name Hannibaal, its meaning is onl^ to be found in its native tongue — namely, b^l'^Sn, (Ohanni- baal,) i. e., the rnercy or favour of Baal ; it was a common name among the Carthaginians. Most of ray readers, no doubt, will now think that these early Bible names are conclusive proof of the Hebrew being the spoken language when these names were given. And, indeed, this was the general opinion of the ancient Jewish and Christian writers, who maintained that, inasmuch as the race of Shem did not participate in the impious work of the building of the tower of Babel; they preserved the language which had come down to Noah from the earliest age. The same opinion has prevailed among most writers up to comparatively recent times, and is still maintained by very many at the present time. It is not my intention of t?^!cing up much space by quoting authorities, but I may just quote a writer who is well known on^is continent. Geoi^e Buih, late If I ^i— -t fv^-Urv^ Ow-N ^I^tov/V^' HISTORY OF HEBREW LITERATURE. 11 Professor of Hebrew and Oriental Literature, New York City UniverHity, in his Commentary on Genesis, in his remarks on the passage : " And the whole earth was of one language, and of one speech," observes: "That this language was the Hebrew, is, we think, in the highest degree probable, though the histori- cal proofs necessary to demonstrate the position, have not been preserved to us. It appears quite evident that throughout Mesopotamia, Babylonia, Assyria, Syria, Palestine, Arabia, and Ethiopia, there was at some distant period but one language. But this region is admitted to have been the original seat of ^e post-diluvian inhabitants of tho earth. The language there spoken, therefore, was in all probability the language of Noah, and the language of Noah can scarcely have been any other than that of the antediluvians, and that this was the Hebrew, cannot well be doubted if we consider the names of the persons and places mentioned in th 'i early history of the world are tA pure Hebrew as the names of Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob, or those of Solomon and Malachi. Thus Adam, Eve, Cain, Seth, Abel, Eden, Nod, Enoch, &c., are all words of purely Hebraic form, structure, and signification." It is, however, suggested by many modern critics, that these terms might be mere translations from more primitive terms, a supposition which we are bound to admit to be possible ; yet is altogether improbable. The great precision with which Moses narrates events in the early history of the human race, has ever called forth the universal admiration among all classes of Bible readers. It is, therefore, not likely that the sacted historian who is so precise in all his descriptions would have altogether passed over unnoticed such an important point as that of having translated all the names of peraons and places from a pre-exist- ing language. That he has not been guilty of such a negl<»ct, we have indisputable proof, for, whenever the name of a place had been changed he invariably stated the fact. Thus, for example, Gen. xiv. 7 : " And they returned and came to En-mishpat, which is Kadesh." Here we have noticed that the more ancient name " En-mishpat," i. e., well of judgment, had been changed into " Kadesh," t. e., holy, probably to commemo- rate some religious acts that were performed there. The foun- tain still exists in the desert of Sin, and is now called Kudes. In verse 8 we have another example, "the King of Bela (the same is Zoar.") The reader will find the reason why the name was changed on referring to ch. xix. 20, 21, 22. The name " Zoar" signifies amallness. In ch. xxiii. 2, we have another striking example: "And Sarah died in Kh'jath-Arba; the same ia Hebron Ja the land of Canaan." Now tyf^p (Kirjath) signifies the city of, and S^'^y^ {Arha) is the name of a chief of the Anakim, an 'I - f ;!] r,V '.I 12 HISTORY OF HEBREW LITERATURE. ancient race of ^ants, who lived in the neighbourhood. It most likely was the birth-place of the chief Arha, and was called after him. In ch. xxiii. 19, this city appears under the name of " Mamre." " And after this, Abraham buried Sarah his wife in the cave of the field of Machpelah before Mamre, the same is Hebron." Mamre and his two brothers, Eshcol and Aner, were great landed proprietoi*s ; and, no doubt, the fiist named being probably the oldest and richest of the three, changed the name of the city, and called it after himself. Later, however, its name was again changed into "Hebron." The Hebrew word "11*113)1 (Clievron) signifies society, ataociation, and it received probably this name as it increased in population and importance. We shall only quote one example more. Jacob, after his nightly vision, took the stone upon which he had laid his head, and set it up for a monument, "And he called the name of that place Beth-el (i. e., the house of Ood), but the name of the city was at first Luz." The Hebrew word tib (Luz) signifies a hazel shrub, and received probably its first name from this kind of shrubs abounding in the place. Now, with those examples before us, is it not reasonable to suppose that if Moses had translated the names of persons and places to a certain period, he would likewise have given some hint that these are not their original names ? But as no such hint is any where given, and so far, all philological investigations have failed to discover the more ancient names, it certainly cannot be regarded as a stretch of imagination, to view these eai'ly names as the primitive terms. But apart from those early names, the Hebrew language itself bears indisputable marks of a primitive language. Some of these marks, neither time nor the onward march of learning and civilization could eradicate. Let us briefly refer to a few, and the first we shall notice will elucidate the passage in Gen. ii. 19. " And the Lord God formed out of the ground every beast of the field, and every fowl of the air ; and brought them to the man to see what he would call them : and whatsoever the man called every living creature, that was its name." Modern criticism has found much to object to in this passage, it will, therefore, receive careful treatment in the Commentary, for the present we take up only that part which beai-s on the subject under consideration. Adam, in bestowing the names on the diflferent creatures, would naturally be guided by some peculiarity that he had observed, and gave such a name which at ones expressed the peculiarity. We shall only adduce a few examples. Thus having heard the cooing of the turtle-dove, IirSTORY OF HERUF.W UTERATI'RE. 1» names he called it "npl {tur), hi'iice tin- jjatiu (nrtiir. Ai^aiii, haviiijf heard the call of the partridge to its mate or young, he called it* 55ip {Jcore), in imitation of it'f call. The raven or crow, he called from its dark colour, 313? (orev) the black bird. But by far more frequently the names are expressive of some propensity ; thus the dork is called T^on (chaaid), the affection- ate bird. The kindness of this bird towards its parents and young has become proverbial among the ancients. The pelican IS callad fijj^p {ka-ath), the di»gorger, because it can disgorge from its crop or sack which it has under its throat anything indigestible which it has swallowed. The camel is called ^Jaj (gamal) the requiter. This animal has become proverbial for its relentless spirit : it never forgets an injury. Basil, who travelled much in the eastei"n countries, says, " What animal tan emulate the camel's resentment of injuries, and his steady and unrelenting anger ?" And Bochai*t. the greatest authority on the natural history of the Bible, in his work Hierozoicon, i/ives some very amusing illustrations of this animal's doings. The lion is called H'^IJS^ (<^W^h), the tearer,irom the ferociousness with whic'i he attacks his prey. " When the lion," remarks Buffon, in his Natural History, " leaps on his prey, he gives a spring of ten or fifteen feet, falls on, seizes it with his fore- jaws, tears it with its claws, and afterwards devours it with lis teeth." The boldness, strength, and ferocity with which the lion tears his prey is frequently alluded to by both sacred and secular writers. We might adduce any number of exam- ples, but these few will suffice. Bochart and many other writers strenuously maintain that the names of the animals and l)irds which are found in the Hebrew Scriptures, are the very same which Adam bestowed upon them, and that these, for the most part, are significant. Josephus says : " God brought to Adam the several species of animals, exhibiting them to him, male and female, and he imposed upon them names by which they are even now called." And the statement of the sacred historian, "and whatsoever Adam called every living creature, that was tlie name thereof," implies that the names were so well given, that there was no necessity of any change being made : they were in every respect suitable. This circumstance, then, like- wise points to the Hebrew being the primitive language. And this is by no means all. When we come to examine the peculiarities of the Hebrew language, we find many *It is well to observe here, that the nninen as originally pronouuoed utay wen have approached nearer to the sounds of these birds. By the introduction of the present vowel system the pronunciation may possibly have been slightly cimnged. 21 ^ ^ iiirsii % ' ?^ 'li^ M u m I •^ I 1 Mi '11' B )'■ ^1 1 I*'' '.» 1 14 HISTORY OF HEBREW LITERATURE. unmistakable indications of infancy, such as might naturally be looked for in the language employed in the childhood of the human race. Let us refer to a few of these. It is well known when children first begin to speak, they make use of incomplete sentences, employing just sufficient words to make themselves understood. In a similar manner the ancient Hebrews, frequently omitted such words which are easily supplied from the context. Hence we have so many words printed in italics in our version of the Bible. This elliptical mode of expression seems to have become so deeply rooted in the language, that we find it still commonly employed even in the latest books of the Old Testament. Thus, for example, in Hebrew the verb fT^ni (ha-yah,) to be, when used as a mere copula, is never expressed, as, " and darkness was upon the face of the deep ;" " and God saw the light, that it it'ts good ;" " and every tree in which is the fruit of a tree." (Gen. 1. 2, 4, 29.) I am the Lord. (Exod. vi. 2.) Frequently too, nouns are often omitted after certain verbs, the verb itself being supposed to suggest the required noun. Thus, for example, after the verb to bear, the reader will often find the noun children printed in italics ; and after the verb to kindle, the noun anger, after to stretch forth, the noun hand ; after to establish, the noun covenant, &c. The verb " represent," has no place at all in the language ; hence we have the expressions : " The three branches are three days." " The three baskets are three days." (Gen. xl. 12, 18.) That is, represent three days." Sometimes, indeed, several words require to be supplied in order to complete the sentence. As, for example. " and to every thing that creepeth upon the earth, wherein there is life, / have given every green herb for meat." (Gen. i. 30.) " And Adah bare Jubal : he was the father of such as dwell in tents, and of sibch as have cattle." (Ch. iv. 20.") Is not the whole land before thee." Separate thyself, I pray thee from me : if thou wilt take the left hand, then 1 will go to the right ; or if thou depart to the right hand, then I will go to the left." (Ch. xiii. 9.) " And Pharoah said to his servants, can we find svych a man as this is, a man in whom the Spirit of God is?" (Ch. xli. 38.) Let us take an example from one of the later books: " Instead of my love they hate me : But I givf myself unt^j prayer." (Pa. cix. 4.) The words in italics are not in the original, and if the reader will read the passages without them, he will at once perceive how childlike the expressions are. Then, again, many of the Hebrew verbs furnish a striking illustration of the gradual f I (laniud,) may either mean he learns or he has learned, as the con- text requires, whilst the latter is used in reference to an action that will take place at some future time. Here then we have as simple a division of time as possibly could be made, just such a division as might naturally be expected to be made in the origin of language. This mode of dividing the time has been aptly illustrated bj- comparing time to a straight line continued ad intinitani. For example, if we draw^ a straight line from left to right, A C B, the letters A B would indicate the indefinite extent of time. If we now suppose, a person stand- "v^ «u/ CJl^/©, ^rvv-s HISTORY OF HEBREW LITERATURE. 17 ini' at the point C, that part of the line from C to A would represent to him the past time, whilst the portion from C to B would represent the future. But aii event may have taken place at a more remote or a nearer time ; this will easily be indicated by shifting the stand point C. If nearer to A , the past will be shorter, and the future longer, and so vice versa. Upon the position of the time called the present, depends there- fore the length of the past and future, which makes the present tense the most important part of the speech. Next in impor- tance comes the 2^a8t tense, for the chief use which man makes of the faculty of speech with which God has endowed him is, to communicate facts or occurrences which have come under his observation to others, hence no doubt it is, that the root or primary form of the verb is found in Hebrew, in the preterite, which, as \:e have seen, expresses both the present and past. The peculiar mode of expressing the imperfect, or what uiijht more appropriately be called iho historic tense, is evidently of a later origin, and distinctly marks a gi-adual deyelupment of the language. " \Ve mig^ pursue this subject still further, and adduce yet more peculiarities pointing to the Hebrew as having been the primeval linguage, but sufficient has been said to enable the reader now to form an intelligent opinion. When a critic pro- nounces ac/ainst a theory, he certainly ought to be prepared to suggest something which he, at least, considers more plausible. 5at here some critics have distinctly asserted that the Hebrew cannot lay any claim to the honour of being the original lan- guage, but are not prepared even to suggest any other. Indeed, it would be impossible to name a language outside the languages composing the Shemitic family which possesses such character- istics of childlike simplicity as the Hebrew, a simplicity which not unfrequontly renders translation very difficult. There are a few writers who have brought forward the 'Sanscrit as a rival to the Hebrew. But the structure of the Sansci'it is altogether too^ perfect, ^and_jve may add too artifi- dal for a primitive language. Here we no longer find only two genders as in the Shemitic family, but also a neuter gender. The dual in Sanscrit is used both with nouns and verbs, wliilst in Hebrew, with few exceptions, it is only employed with things which consist of two by nature, as hands, feet, luiags, &c., or which are made double by art, as a pair of tongs, a pair of scales; with verbs it is never used. *The term Sanskrit or Sanscrit denotes thoroughly done or ^finished, and is the ancient language of the Hindoos, in which their sacred literature, and the griatest ijortion of their ritual, scientific, political, and legal works are written. It l^elongs CO that stock of languages commonly called Indo-Germanic or Indo- European, which embraces the Indian, the Medo- Persian Grseco- Latin, the Germanic, the Lithuauiau-Sclavonian, and the Gallo-Celtic families. ^"',>-V^ r. -* — \ V ! g ll! ' 18 HISTORY OF HEBREW LlTl'.RATUUE. I* J i/0Y\y^X/^ I ! !*: LJ-l ' Most languages are contented with six cases, but the Sansc'tit has no less than eight, namely : besides, the ordinary cases also, le to say whether Lord Monboddo obtained his information of the orang-outang using a stick for defence from personal observations, or whether he obtained it from such sensational works as " The Lion Hunter," " The Orang-outang Hunter," »fec., which generally give the most exaggerated accounts, in order to make the book more saleable. But sup- posing it were really the case, it would be no more evidence of the orang-outang possessing reasoning power, than other animals which make use of their horns or other parts as weapons of defence, unless we suppose that a bull in using his horns, and a serpent its fangs reason in a similar manner. If, indeed, naturalists will take instinct for reason, the result would by no means be very complimentary to them, for in that case animals would prove more expert scientists than they them- selves. What botanist could tell at sight whether a plant, which he had never seen or heard of before, contained noxious properties or not ? Such information he could only obtain by first experimenting upon it. An animal, on the contrary, would either at once feed upon it as suitable for food, or turn away from it as unfit to eat. This is nothing more than instinct whicL the Allwise Creator has implanted in the animal not pos- sessing the faculty of reason or understanding by which it could discover what is good or injurious. The human being, on the contrary, who is gifted with understanding, does not possess that instinct, *or he can through the exercise of his reasoning powers, discover what is good or injurious. As ani- mals are guided by instinct what to feed upon, so are they likewise by the same instinct guided how to defend themselves. They have no variety of defences, because they have not the understanding to choose which would be the most efi*ectual. ' Man, on the contrary, when he sees that one mode of defence fails, his understanding prompts him to try others. But it may be said, that although Scripture speaks of the understanding being the gift of God, it nowhere speaks of man being endowed with language by his Creator. Certainly not, this is not affirmed in so many words, nor do we think such an affirmation neceasary, since what is recorded in the three ! t HISTORY OF HEBREW LTTERATURE. 23 lemselves, first chapters of Genesis is most explicit and decisive enough upon this point. Indeed, from the manner in which the events are recorded in those chapters, it seems quite evident that the sacred writer considered the fact quite self-evident and suffi- ciently established to require any other notice or testimony than that which the plain narrative itself affords. Thus it is recorded in Gen. ii. 20 : " And the man gave names to all cattle, and to the fowl of the air, and to every beast of the field ; but for the man there was not found an help meet for him." What more direct proof can we possibly have than is furnished in this verse that Adam must have been endowed with lan- guage by his Creator at his creation, for it will be seen that the naming of the animals is here stated to have taken place even before the creation of Eve. And even this is not the first indication of Adam possessing language immediately after his creation, for the sacred narrative informs us, that on his being placed in the garden of Eden, " the Lord God commanded the man, saying, of every tree of the garden thou mayest freely eat : but of the tree of the knowledge of good and evil thou shalt not eat of it : for in the day that thou eatest thereof thou shalt surely die." (verses 16, 17). Adam, then, must have had language to understand the force of the commandment, other- wise he could not have been held responsible to keep it. To what extent our first parents were endowed with vocal powers it is impossible to say : all we wish to establish is, that God endowed man at least with the principal elements of language to enable him at once to express in speech the emo- tions of his mind. Wo find, however, throughout the Scrip- tures God never employing sujiernatural power, so long as an obj'jct could be obtained by natural means, and hence, we may reasonably infer, that here also He exercised His mighty power only so far as was absolutely necessary in bestowing upon man just so much language as his immediate wants required, leaving the further cultivation of it to bo carried on by the exercise of his own intellect. This appears to me to be the only reasonable solution of the problem regarding the origin of language. All attempts to account for its origin in any other way, have hitheito resulted only in miserable failure, and we may safely say will fare no better in future. August Schleicher, a well krown German i)hilol()gist, remarks, in his work on the German language : " The enquiry concerning the origin of language, (Endelutiig der Sinxiche,) lies beyond the limits of philology, i. e., the science of man considered in his entire nature. * * As regards the mysterious origin of roots and their signification, or, in other words, the origin of language itself, we do not even venture to conjecture. For here the etymologist loses the ground from beneath his feet, which he :il h'- ^^ *^ ■]! 24 HISTORY OF HEBREW LITERATURE. B> f has hitherto so confidently trodden. The formation of roots itself lies beyond the limits of philology, for language must first be in existence before the study of it is possible. The doctrine of the origin of language must therefore be excluded from the science of philology, just as the origin of simple ele- mentary matter from physical science." Baron von Humboldt speaks more decisively on the subject. He very properly remarks : " 1 here could be no invention of language unless its type already existed in the human under- standing. Man is man only by mean", of speech, but in order to invent speech he must be already man." By which, of course, he means that he must have been so endowed by liis Maker, as to be able by his understanding to'form words suitable to express his mind. Hence we find the ancient Greek poets also calling man simply by the epithet, " fiepoiro'i," i. e. the speech-gifted. On a subject of so much interest, not to say of importance, I am desirous to have my opinion well fortified with authorities ; the reader will, therefore, excuse my quoting the views of a few other writers. Calmet remarks : " Moses represents Adam and Eve as the stock whence all nations spring. He describes them as reason- able and intelligent persons, speaking and giving names to things. Now, if we admit God as the Creator, there is no difficulty in acknowledging him to be the author of the lan- guage of the first man, and it is difficult to conceive of his attaining the power of language without Divine inspiration." (See Dictionary of the Bible, article " Language.") Prof. Bush, in his Commentary on Genesis, says : " The impo- sition of names upon the animal creation by their new master might likewise be intended to call into play the vocal powers with which he was endowed. He must early have acquired the use of language, as an associate would have been given him in vain, unless they could have communicated with each other by medium of speech, they would have been deprived of all the pleasures ai-ising from rational and social intercourse. If lan- guage was heaven -taught, and certainly the human faculties appear unequal to its invention, no period agrees so well with the revelation as that when Adam formed the vocabulary of the living creatures." Dr. Kalisch, in his Commentary on Genesis, observes : " Lan- guage is, indeed, the spontaneous emanation of the human mind ; it is implanted in his nature, in furnishing man, besides his external organization, with reason and imagination. God bestowed upon him the principal elements for commurication by speech, it is as natural a function of his intellect as re lection; intelligent speech is one of the chief characteristics jf nuin ; * * * the germ was bestowed by God, man had to do no more than cultivate it." HISTORY OF HEBREW LITERATURE. 25 Prof. Max Miiller, in his first series of Lectures, p. 327 also contends that "man could not, by his own power, have acquired the faculty of speech, which is the distinctive character of iiiankind unattained by the mute creation ;" and then goes on to confirm his proposition by giving the same quotation from Humboldt's writings, which I have above given. The author of the "Study of Words" takes a similar view as Humboldt ; "God gave man language," he says, " because he could not be man without it." Dr. Leland, a well-known and able writer, remarks : " From the account given by Moses of the primeval state of man, it appears that tie was not left to acquire ideas in the ordinary ivay, which would have been too tedious and slow, as he was circumstanced, but ivas at once furnished with the knorvledge which ivas then necessary for him. He ivas immediately endoiued with the gift of language, which necessarily supposes that he was furnished with a stock of ideas, a specimen of which he gave in giving names to the inferior animals which were brought before him for that purpose :" (" Advantage and Neces- sity of the Christian Revelation," vol. ii. ch. 2, p. 19 of the 8vo. ed.) Dr. Samuel Johnson was of opinion that language " must have come by inspiration, and that inspiration was necessary to give man the faculty of speech, to inform him that he may have speech, which, I think, says he, he could no more find out without inspiration than cows or hogs would think of such a faculty." (" Boswell's Life of Johnson," vol ii. p. 447.) We might yet fill quite a number of pages with quotations from author." who expressed similar vi^'^s, but we think that sufficient has been said for the reader to foim now for himself an intelligent opinion on this subject. Those who desire to read still more upon this point may consult the very interesting pamphlet of Dr. John Ellis, entitled An enquiry, ^vhence cometh wisdom and understanding to man ? p. 8 c&c, also Dr. Davis's Xote 0, on Cicero Tuscul. Disbut. lib. i. caj). 25. Likewi.se Walton's Proleg. iii. 26 ; Eusebius's Proiparat. Evangel, lib. xi. cap. 6 ; and Rowland's Mona A ntiqua Restaurata, p. 293. ! 1; ; THE ART OF WRITING. There can be no doubt that the first step in the art of writ • ing was, to convey ideas by picture representation or hiero- glyphics. The names of the Hebrew letters bear testimony to this for the name of each letter is a perfect Hebrew word denoting the hierogl3'phic or picture representation from which it was originally derived, and to which some of the letters do still bear a resemblance. Thus, for example, the name of the 96 HISTORY OF HEBREW LITERATURE. fii'.-it letter Aleph, denotes an ox, the name of the second, Beth, a It 0X186, the name of the third, Gimel, a camel, rnd so on. The transition from picture writing to letter \ riting was, no doubt, gradual, and it would prove, therefore, ^ il futile labour iii attempting to seek the origination of the Jirst letters. All Hiuient writers, however, attribute the invention of alpha- betical .vriting to some very early age, and to some country in th(^ east. The Phoenicians ascribed its invention to Ihaaut, the Ciialdeans to Cannes, the Egyptians to Thot or Hermes, thus bearing testimony that the invention of the art of writing wc.nt further back than the beginning of history. Hence Pliny declares also, that the use of letters must have been eternal, i. e., extremely ancient, ex quo apparet aetevniis literarum usus. " Hist. Nat." vii. 56. ^^\fy, a-' cii.'*, • This testimony of heathen writers is very important at the f yi) n^ ^siJ-r^^ present time, for ever since Wolf began to dispute the anti- [ J Jd "^(Uaa^*^ '^"'^'^ °^ ^^® Homeric poems ("Prolegomena ad Homer," ip. ^'^ ' 50) on grounds which he endeavours to deduce from the History pJ^.^CAN-^t'NTrQf j;hg j^j.^ yf Writing, some of our rationalistic writers have taken the key-note, and began to apply his arguments to the Pentateuch, endeavouring thus to invalidate the antiquity and genuineness of it. Here are a few of their assertions : Hart- man says : " Not till the period of the judges when they reposed in their fortunately won possessions, were they able to advance -^y\Ax-- i- / 4. 4 ft A ^ >X^»-~* '^ * ^^ ^ %J^^ in the path of civilization, and to obtain from their diligent ,.^^, ^^^^ ^ neighbours the precious gift of the art of writing." Thus '^j^*'- asserting that the art of writing was not known in the "^ ' Mosaic age. Von Boblen goes still further, he asserts that the highest date for Semitic writing among any of the Semitic tribes is scarcely ten centuries before the Christian era, and that even this is by no means certain. " Whoever guesses more," he goes on to say, " he may guess indeed, and easily add a thousand years, since, without solid grounds, it onlv depends on faith w4»ich he finds." Similar assertions are made by other writers of this school. These assertions so boldly and confidently put forth in tne face of the traditions of all the nations of antiquity, and against almost the unanimous voice of the most eminent modem ^- *' (Vj^^ writers, and I might f^ without even having 5-1. ^ ;, i r 1 1! ■ i'-'-^i iif '! 1» HISTORY OF HEBREW LITERATURE. alone furnishes us with a genealogical account of the human family from the earliest times. We are asked, " Where did Moses obtain the multifarious and complicated ages of the antediluvians from?" We will not merely dismiss the question with the brief reply, that Moses was an inspired wi'iter, but rather answer, that he drew his information from existing genealogical records. We must, however, be still allowed to maintain that, being an inspired writer, he could supply anything that might be wanting in the chain of descent, or correct a mistake if it occurred in the account. Such a genealogical record we have in Gen. v. : " This is the book of the generations of man." The Hebrew word ^SQ (sep^er) rendered in the English version by "book," merely means a writing, a hill, a contract, Tnemorial, &c., and might, there- fore, have been translated the record. It contains a minute chronological list of the ten generations between Adam and Noah, and embraces a period of 1556 years from the creation of Adam to the birth of Shem. The list bears proofs of authenticity on the face of it. No imposter would have dreamed of making up such a list, for observe, it gives first the years before the birth of the first son ; then the rest of the life, then the extent of the whole life. The following is a tabular view of the different ages, as given in the chapter : Patriarchs. 1. Adam 2. Seth 3. Enos 4. Cainan 5. Mahalaleel 6. Jaretl 7. Enoch 8. Methuselah 9. Lamech . . . . 10. Noah Years before birth of first Restoflife. Extent whole 1 sou. 130 800 930 105 807 912 90 815 906 70 840 910 65 830 895 162 800 962 65 300 365 187 782 969 182 595 777 500 950 i r We must observe here that the numbers given in the Sep- tuagint and Samaritan versions differ somewhat from those given in the original Hebrew text, but the best critics are almost unanimous in their opinion that the Septuagint and Samaritan variations are corruptions of the Hebrew text. The longevity assigned to these patriarchs is another proof of the authenticity of the record. No imposter who was accus- tomed to see the age of man rarely attain to 100 years would have allotted such great ages to human beings. But these very high ages are eagerly laid hold of to dispiove the veracity of the Mosaic record. We are told that the most eminent physiologists have declared, " that an age above 200 HISTORY OF HEBREW LITERATURE. 29 veal's, even under the most favourable circumstances, is a physical impossibility. We doubt not, that this conclusion is based upon the best information at present obtainable, and is quite correct. But what information have we as to the pre- vailing state of the climate, mode of life, or many other circum- stances that may have been conducive to longevity before the flood ? And without this knowledge all that physiologists may write or say against the extraordinary vitality of the nntedilu- vian patriarchs, is merely conjecture. In reconciling the longevity before the flood, with the short life of mankind after it, it is all important that we start from the Scripture statement, that man came from his Maker's hand an immortal being, for it shows that he originally was so con- stituted as being capable of living for ever. But man sinned, and with sin he brought the penalty of death upon himself and his descendants. It would be vain to conjecture how this change from immorality to mortality was brought about, whether by change of constitution, or by climatic changes and other causes, the Scriptures have not revealed it, nevertheless, the fact still remains. But whilst man was doomed to die, by the great mercy of God his life was not at once curtailed to its present short period, but only when he sank from wickedness into still greater depravity, so that at last, as the sacred writer expressed it, " great rvas the wickedness of man in the earth, and every imagination" (or form) " of the thoughts of his heart was only evil continually," (Gen. vi. 5,) that the Divine decree went forth, that henceforth the span of life was to be 120 years. (Gen. vi. 3.) And thus it was, as a writer has properly remarked, every progress in the career of sin caused a new reduction in the years of man's life ; toil increased, and the years were again curtailed ; the greater the interval which separated man from the happy days of Paradise, the shorter grew his life, till it was at last contracted to its present narrow limits, and became comparable to the " shadow that passes," " the cloud that vanishes," or " the dream that disappears." Thus whilst Noah lived 950 years Abraham lived only 175, Sarah 127, Isaac 180, Jacob 147, Moses 120, Joshua 110, whilst David places the usual extent of life at 70 : or, under exceptional circumstances, at 80. (Ps. xc. 10). Josephus, not always very orthodox in his explanations of miracles, defends the literal acceptation of the patriarchial ages. He says : " But let no one, upon comparing the lives of the ancients with our lives, and with the few years wdiich we now- live, think that what we have said of them is false, or make the shortness of our lives at present an argument that neither did they attain to .so long a duration of life, for those ancients were \ . r. .V . rfC _...^-' — ft : L.Cf^'>-v^l <;l«" Yt«'v* I I '^\^ fA^, 30 HISTORY OF HEBUEW LITERATURE, :Mi ';! rl 4 '0 I V. beloved of God, and (lately) made by God himself, and because their food was then fitter for the prolongation of life, might well live so great a number of years ; and besides, God afforded them a longer time of life on account of their virtue ;" [surely Josephus cannot mean here all the antediluviuns, for at the time of the flood only Noah's family was found righteous] " and the good use they made of it in astronomical and geometrical discoveries, which would not have afforded the time for fore- telling (the period of the stars) unless they had lived six hundred years, for the great year is completed in that interval. Now, I have for witness to what I have said, all those that have written antiquities, both among the Greeks and bar- barians ; for even Manetho, who wrote the Egyptian History, and Berosus, who collected the Chaldean Monuments, and Mochus, and Hestiseus, and besides these, Hieronj'mus the Egyptian, and those who composed the Phoenician history, agree to what I here say, Hesiod also, and Hecatseus and Hellanicus and Acusilaus, and besides these, Ephorus and Nicolaus relate that the ancients lived a thousand years." (Ant. b, 1 ch. 3, sec. 9.) Some writers in order to reconcile the patriarchial longevity have advanced the supposition tiiat the years only meant monOis. But why should Moses, with the ages use the word nStt? (shanak) i year, to express a month, when in all other places where a month is to be expi'essed he makes use of the regular word BJTH (chodesh) to express it. But it is somewhat surprising that those critics should not have perceived the great absurdity that this supposition would give rise to. If the reader will refer back to the tabular view of the different ages, he will find Enos was 90 years old before the birth of his first son, Cainan was 70 yeare, and Enoch 65 years. Now, if the years mean only months, what is the result ? We have Enos a father when 7^ years old, Cainan when not quite G years, and Enoch when 5 years and 5 months. Some commen- tators are perfectly reckless in their interpretations ; they jump at conclusions without, in the least, examining what the conse- quences may be. But to return to the subject of the antiquity of the writing, from which we have been digressing. We have stated that the antediluvian family records furnish positive proof that the art of writing must have been known before the deluge. The next indication of its existence we have in the transaction of Abraham purchasing the field from Ephron the Hittite, for a burying place. The literal rendering is : " And the field, and the cave which is in it, stood to Abra- ham," (i. e., was made sure to Abraham,) " for a possession of a burying-place by the sons of Heth." (Gen. xxiii. 20). It is not easily seen how the field could have been secured to Abra- HISTORY OF HEBREW LITERATURE. 31 ham's family without some writing of having paid the purchase money. It is true, the transaction was made, and the money paid before witnesses, but the witnesses would be long dead before Joseph brought up the remains of his father from Egypt to bury them in the same field, and if so he would have nothing to establieli his claim to the field, unless h^; could do so by some written document. The next indication of writing is the mentioning of a QfiH {chotham,) i. e., a signet-ring or seal, Gen. xxxviii., 18, which Tamar asked Judah as a pledge, and upon which probably his name was engraved. But in the time of Moses the art of writing seems to have been quite established among the Israelites. Already during their stay in Egypt there existed officers among them called Qi-ltOTD {shoterim), i. e. vMters, (see Exod. v. 15, IJ),) who no doubt were so called from their occupation in writing docu- ments for those who could not write, or executing public docu- ments. The Hebrew word is in the English version rendered "officers," but that rendering does not convey the true meaning of the word, which is derived from the verb "itOtSl (shatar,) which not only in the Hebrew but in all its cognate languages signifies to write, and the word ahoterhn is in reality only the participle of the verb, which in accordance with the usage of the lan- guage may be used as a noun of (Ujency. Those " writers," carried an inkhorn in their girdle, (See Ezek. ix. 2, 3, 11,) which was so made, as being capable of holding the writing material, and a knife. (See Jer. xxxvi. 23). In Exod. xvii. 14, God comniands Moses to record the victory which Joshua gained over Amalek " in a book." Again, Num. v. 23, the priest is commanded to write certain " curses in a book ;" and ch. vii. 2, 3, Moses is commandc^d to take twelve rods," and " write every man's name upon his rod, but upon the rod of Levi he was to " write Aaron's name.'" In Deut. xxiv. 1, we have mention made of a written "bill of divorcement," and so we find the art of writing frequently alluded to in other passages of the Pentateuch. To say, therefore, that the art of writing was not known in the time of Moses, is .simply charging him with making statements which cannot possibly be correct. But we may fairly ask, where was the necessity f'>r Moses to employ the word " shoteriTn," i. e., vjriters, to express office ra in Exod. v. (J, 10, 15, 19 ? Is it likely that if the art of writing had not been known then, that such a word would have sug- gested itself to his mind ? Is it not more probable that he would have employed the words 0">"iO {^-^JUv^ JA. O^A.si- ^ir-^' '■*: li: '■■•: im '! 'Hi r : '^^1 «2 HISTORY OF HEBREW LITERATURE. 1 1' I'i words denoting an officer or overseer, that could have been employed. It appears to us quite probable that those (shoterm) writers of the children of Israel were appointed by the task- iniisitjrs ui take down the number of bricks that were daily to be mad<;, and that they Were held responsible for the proper quantJLv being made. Hence we read £x. v. 14, " And tlie officers (iit, writers) of the children of Israel, which Pharaoh's task-mast'jrs had set over them, were beaten, and demanded, Wherefore have ye not fulfilled your task in making brick, both yesterday' and to-day as heretofore ?" This would at once account for Moses using the word shoterim in preference to any other. In the time of David and Solomon — and it is impossible to sa}' how long before — the Hebrew alphabet had already assumed the .same order as exists now ; this is evident from the acrostic or alphabetical poems of which there are twelve extant in the Old Testament, viz : Psalms xxv., xxxiv., xxxvii., cxi,, cxii., cxix., cxlv. ; Proverbs xxx., verses 10, 31 ; Lamentations i., ii., iii., iv. The form is, they consist of twenty-two lines or stanzas, according to the number of letters in the He- brew alphabet, and every line or stanza begins with each letter in regular order as it stands in the alphabet. Thus the first line would commence with j^ a, the second with 3 h. &c. Some of these alphabetical poems ai'e quite perfect, whilst in some others sometimes a letter is omitted, ])robably arising from the author not being able to find a suitable word begin- ning with the letter required. Of the jjerfect ones we may nu'ntion, for instance, the one contained in Prov. xxx. 10, 31, where the reader, on referring to the Hebrew Bible, will find every verse to connnence with the letter in regular order, Psalms cxi. and cxii consist of ten stanzas each, every stanza ha\'ing two lines, except the two last, which contain three lines each, thus making up the number twenty-two. Another alphabetical poem of somewhat different construction we have in Lam. iii., which consists of twenty two stanzas of three lines each, here each of the three lines forming the first stanza commence with the first lettei' Aleph, the three lines forming the second stanza commence with the second letter Beth, and so on. We may hei'e dismiss the subject on the art of ivriting, and leave it to the good judgment of the reader whether our remarks on its great antiquity do not at once commend them- selves tocommon sense even apart from the Scriptural testimony. The supposition, on the other hand, of some of our modern critics, that the human family could have existed for upwards of two thousand years without the means and necessity of communicating their ideas by writing, preserving all the while family records, making contracts, carrying on commerce with neighbouring countries, &ic., requires, to say the least, no uncom- mon stretch of imagination. HISTORY OF HEBREW LITERAFURE. ARITHMETIC. The necessity of some signs to ex^jress numerical value must soon have made itself, felt after man began to multiply upon earth. Transactions of various kinds would immediately follow the invention of various kinds of instruments spoken of in Gen. iv. 21, 22. Indeed, it is difficult to conceive how any largo community could subsist without the necessity of some trans- actions that would require numerical calculations. We have already .shown that genealogical records apparently were kept from the earliest times, and this, of course, implies the use of numerical characters. As any signs, however, would serve to express numbers, hence, no doubt, the letters of the alphabet were utilized for that purpose from the most pri»r»itive times. In the Hebrew, Chaldee, and Syriae, there are even at the pre- sent time no other signs than the alphabet, and in most editions of the Hebrew and Syriac Bibles, the chapters and ver.ses are still numbered in that way, and so in the Rabbinical writings. The Arabians too, at tirst employed the alphabet as numerals, only later they adopted special numerical signs. In the text of Soi'ipture the letters are not now employed as numbers, but they are expressed by regular words, as with us, as "]ni^ (ec/iad) one, tD"'!D'!25 (sheiiayim,) tivo, &c., but whether this was the case in the very earliest manuscripts, it is impos- sible to .say. In the time of the patriarch Jacob we have already the large number, " thousands of myriads" mentioned, (Gen. xxiv. 60,) which clearly indicates that the mode of operating by numbers was then already known. - Is ? MONEY. The oldest money employed was silver, apparently cut in small bars of certain weight, for convenience sake. The largest of these was called shekel, i. e., tueight. There was no inscrip- tion upon it, except perhaps the number marked upon it whether it was of one, two, or more shekel, weight. As this afforded a good opportunity to practise deception, for it was easy to make the bars of lighter weight without having recourse to the modern laborious practice, in cant language generally called sweating, the shekels were always weighed, Thus we find when Abraham bought the field from Ephron the Hittite, he " weighed to Ephron the silver which he had named in the presence of the sons of Heth, four hundred shekels of silver current money with the merchant." (Gen. xxiii. 16). So the ancient Egyptians had their money in gold and silver rings, as we find depicted on their monuments, a man having a balance on his shoulder, one of the scales containing the 24 \ i' !'• ul ill pis M HISTORY OF HEBREW LITERATURE. I / e-^f^ 1 1 ^ *5 .<^•■ weight, and the other the rings. Ring money was also used among the Celts, first introduced among them probably by Phoenician merchants. In Gen. xxxiii. 19, we have mention made of the HtS'^ttp (keaita/i), which only denotes something weighed. The root of this word is obsolete now in Hebrew, but in the Arabic the word kaaata denotes to weigh justly, hence to he just. It appears to have been a bar of silver of heavier weight than the shekel. We are told in the above passage that Jacob gave " one hundred kesitah," (Eng. Vers., one hundred pieces of money,) for a portion of a field. If the piece of land which Jacob bought was of as much value as that which Abraham had bought, in that case the kesitah would be the value of four shekels. For convenience sake they had also a half shekel, called heka, (Gen. xxiv. 22,) and the gerah, which was the twentieth part of a shekel, (Exod. xxx. 13.) The latter was the smallest weight and coin in use among the Hebrews. In later books of the Bible we find also mention made of the maneh, which was of the value of one hundred shekels as we learn from I Kings x. 17. Very large sums were calculated by the kikkar talent, the largest weight, which was equal to 3,000 shekels. The shekel of silver was in value equal to about 65 cents. The shekel of gold, which was half the weight of the silver shekel, was equal to about $4.56. The talent of silver wai~equal to about ^1368.75. And the talent of gold, which was of the same weight, was equal to about S219,008. We find also frequent mention made in Scripture of the shekel and the talent of the sanctuary, which some suppose to have been of double value of the common shekel and talent. Others, however, think, and in our opinion very properly, that the word " sanctuary" is merely added to express an exact weight, in accordance with the standard maintained in the Tabernacle or Temple. The Hebrews seem to have had no .stamped or coined money of their own until the time of Simon Maccabreus, the high priest and prince, 143-136 B.C. The coins in use among them Uf'" that time were Phoenician coins. Some of the coins of Simon and his successors have down to us in good condition. The shekel bears the inscription in Samaritan or old Hduc^v characters on one side, " Shekel Yisrael," i. e. shekel of Israel. The letters are in the position as on coins. In the centre is the emblem of a manna pot, and above the letter " Aleph," used as the numeral one, to indicate either the first year of Simon's 01 BISTORT OF HEBREW LITERATURE. S5 roign, or the year of the coinage. We think the former more probable. On the other side the inscription is, " Yerushal- ayim kedoshah/' i. e., Jeruialem the holy, having in the centre Aaron's rod budding. The half shekel is of smaller size, but bears similar inscriptions. On one side are the words " Chatzi ha-shokel," i. e. half a shekel, with the manna pot in the centre, and the letter Aleph denoting the numeral one above it. On tho other side are the words, " Yerushalayim kedoshah," i. e., Jerusalem the holy, having Aaron's budding rod in the centre of the coin. Cavedoni and some others with him think that the emblems are a cup or vase of the temple and a lily. They say that the manna pot had a cover, which the emblem on the coin has not. This is, however, a very feeble argument to put against the old and universally held opinion among the Jews that the emblem represented a manna pot and Aaron's budding rod. The cover may be flat, and in that case it would not show on the inscrip- tion of the coin. The top part of the vase differs also slightly in the coins of the different years, which would indicate that it is a representation of the manna pot which was lost when Nebuchadnezzar took Jerusalem, and of which there remained only a traditional recollection. On the other hand, if it had been intended to represent any cup or vase then in use in the temple, the facsimile of the vase would have been precisely the same on all the coins, for the Hebrews were very particular in not altering anything sacred. In the fourth year of his reign Simon also issued copper coins. The copper shekels have tho same inscriptions and emblems as the silver shekels. The half shekels, however, differ in both these particulars. On one side is the inscription " Shenath arba Chatzi" i. e., in the fourth year — one half. In the centre there are two bunches of thickly leaved branches, and between them is a citron. On the other side, is the inscrip- tion " Ligullath Zion," i. e., the redemption of Zion. In the centre is a palm tree and on each side of it at the base is a basket filled with dates and other fruits. The significance of the emblems of the two bunches of thickly leavc'l brn • lies and the citron, is found in the ceremonial obser- led Lev. xxiii. 40, " And ye shall take to yourselves Jay." {i. e., of the feast of Tabernacles, which is the oi 0 fruit harvest, (see verse 39,) " the fruit of goodly >," 1. I ("the boughs of goodly trees," as the English version .i it,) " branches of the palm trees, and the boughs of thick trees, and willows of the brook ; and ye shall rejoice before the i.')RD your God sevn days." These branches, with the fruit, t'ormed the festal b ich which every Israelite was to carry at the feast of Taben es, and is still observed at the present I ' i 86 HISTORY OF HEBREW LITERATURE. i h :' day, at least among the orthodox Jews in Germany, &c. The following is a part of the prayer recited or chanted at the time r " As thou didst save those who rejoiced in the renewed building of the second Temple, when they carried the palm-branch, (Lulab), all the seven days in the sanctuary, so save us we beseech thee," &c. (Service for the feast of Tabernacles). The baskets containing fruit, no doubt are emblems of the first fruit offerings, and probably also of the great fertility of the land. " Then did they till the ground in peace, and the earth gave her increase, and the trees of the field their fruit." I. Maccab. xiv. 8. Simon coined also some quarter pieces of copper. On one side is the inscription, " Shenath arba E-evia," /. c, in the fourth year — one quarter. In the centre are the figures of " two bun- dles of branches " On the other side are the words, " Ligullath Zion," i. e., the redemi^tion of Zion, and an " Ethrog,'' i. e., a citron, in the centre . The smallest coin was one-sixth of a shekel, also of copper; This coin bears on one .ide the inscription, " Ligullath Zion, i. e., the redenijytlon of Zion, and the manna pot in the centre ; and on the other side the words, " Shenath Arba," in the fourth year, having in the centre, " a bundle of branches between two Etiirogs," i. e., citrons. We must not omit to mention that there are some coins of the above now extant, Avith the inscriptions in Hebrew char- acters, as now in use, instead of the old Hebrew character, but they are generally considered as spurious. MATHEMATICS. We have no opportunity of judging from Scripture to what extent the study of mathematics was carried on among the ancient Hebrews : it is, liowevei', not probable that their know- ledge went much beyond the necessary acquirements of every day life We have already seen that from the mention of such a large number as "thousands of myriads," (Gen. xxiv. GO,) in Jacob's time, the art of computation by numbers must even I then have been in an advanced state. Whethei the science of j geometry was known to the Hebrews, or to what extent, before i their sojourn in Egypt it is impossible to sa}^ but the Egyptians were from a very early period acquainted with geo7netri/,m attested by Herod, ii. 109. Diod. SicuL 1 81, Wilkinson, Manners and Customs of the ancient Egyptians, vol. 1 ch. 2,[ p. 74, and it may reasonably be inferred that the Israelite.' would learn the science from them if thev had no knowledgel of it before. Algebra, another branch oi j^ure mathematics, isj of course of much later growth. As regards the various sciences generally termed mixed oil ^ HISTORY OF HEBREW LITERATURE. 87 applied mathematics, we cannot possibly form any idea to what extent they were known to the ancient Hebrews. From the very beautiful figure, "Keep me like the little man of the pupil of the eye," (Ps. xvii. 8,) it is very evident that at least optics was not entirely unknown in the time of David. The figure undoubtedly refers to the little image which is termed on the retina of the eye of the object at which we look, and which resulls in sight. The beauty of this figure is entirely lost by the free translation of the passage in the English version, " Keep me as the apple ot the eye," and affords a striking example how some of the most beautiful figures of the Old Testament are entirely lost by translation. ASTRONOMY. -f^t T' / ^ As regards astronomy another branch of applied mathe- matics, there can be no doubt that some attention had been paid to this important science from the earliest time. In the time of Moses the years were solar yeai's of twelve months of thirty days each, excopcing the tiuelfth which consisted of thirty-five days. " We learn also from the enumeration of the clays of the deluge (Gen. vii.) that the year consisted of 3G5 days. At a much later date the Hebrews, however, adopted the reckoning by lunar months, especially in religious aflairs.* ift^i— QvJ Further, in the book of Job we find several constellations • ^ m^ ^'v^-^'i. /^^■•" ■ In. -vX^-Ca. T^^ mentioned, as for example ch. ix. 9, " Who made the bear {ur.-ia major) Orion and the Pleiads, and the chambers of the south." "The chambers of the south" here used to express all the stais of the southern hemisphere. We may also mention en passant, that the Hebrew term for " Orion" is b"'C3 [Kesil) whicii denotes a fool or an im2yious person, for the Orientals regarded " Orion" as an impious giant chained in the sky. Hence the expression Job. xxxviii. 31, " Canst thou loosen the bands of Orion :'" Among some of the Oriental people, there existed even a tradi- tion that this giant was no other than the impious tyrant Nimrod, m ho, on account of his blasphemy and rebellion against God, and for inviting the people to build the tower of Babylon, *From the earliestltimes the Hebrews began their year at the first day of the month of I'Tjpjn (7'w/i>-i,) that is about the 21st of September. The deluge, therefore, which, according to Gen. vii. 2, began "in the second m'>nth, the seventeenth day of the month," would answer to about the 8th Novenibe)_ After the Exodus, God set apart the month of "10^5 (Xisan) — corresponding to part of March and part of April — as the chief of the months in commemoration of the deliverance of the children of Israel, and from which afterwards all the sacred feasts were reckoned. The civil year remained unchanged, and to this Jay tlie Jewish festival nDtbn '035^'^ {^osh hasli-shanuh) heginnbnj of the year commences on the first day of the month of TUhri, Krxl \J>- i^kSLJ r>-v^ ^i.^'Rl ^ , i .i I'i ' ■ '..: ■; tt' , \ |L «■' ; ■U ■• ' P i > .: 'ii J 11 ■ 1'' i 1 1 ■Ml )' Si ir ' 0 \ E 1 ^ it i I 1 a 1 y^: 38 HISTORY OF HEBREW LITERATURE. was punished by being chained up in the sky. Josephus, too, speaking of the rebellion of Nimrod, remarks : " Now it was Nitnrod who excited them to such an affront and contempt of God. He was a grandson of Ham, the son of Noah, a bold man, and of great strength of hand. He persuaded them not to ascribe it to God, as if it was through his means they were happy, but to believe that it was their own courage which procured that happiness * * * He also said he would be revenged on God, if he should have a mind to drown the world again ; for that he would build a tower too high for the waters to be able to reach, and that he would avenge himself on God for destroying thair forefathers." (Ant. I. iv. sec. 2, 3. Indeed, the name Nimrod as derived from the verb Ti^ {marad) i. e., to rebel, denotes a rebel. In ch. xxvi. 13, the constellation " dragon" or " serpent" is mentioned. "By his creating spirit he both adorned the heavens, his hand hath formed the extended serpent." Now, as the mentioning of these constellations presupposes a certain knowledge of the science of astronomy, it is interesting even from a scientific stand-point alone, to enquire as to the time when the book of Job was written, for, if as is maintained by Clericus, Warburton, Heath, Gesenius, Bauer, and others, that no earlier date than some time after the return from the Baby- lonian captivity can be assigned for the composition of the book, then, indeed,'*it would be nothing surprising to find allusions to heavenly bodies, for by that time, the study of astronomy had become a very favourite study among the Baby- lonians. But we have not the slightest sympathy with this extravagant notion, nor even with' the supposition which places the composition of the book in the times of David or Solomon, and that probably it nc ay have been written by the latter him- self, as was held by Gr'3gorius, Naz, Luther, Doderlein, Augusti, Welte, and many others. The opinions of such renowned men unquestionably demand at all times the highest consideration, but there are a host of equally as great men who ascribe a much higher antiquity to the book, and maintain that it must have been written, if not before the time of Moses, certainly in his time, and not a few even hold that it was written by the great lawgiver himself. This opinion is maintained by the Talmud, many Rabbinical writers, and several Fathers of the early Church. Corpzov, Ilgen, Bertholdt, Eichbom, Stuhlmann, Michaelis, Huetius, Jahn, Friedlander, Stier, Dr. Hales, Faber, and many others. An array of authorities certainly not to be despised. But where there exists such diverse opinions, probably the reader would like to have some Scriptural authority to guide him in his choice a« to which of these opinions he should HISTORY OF HEBREW LITERATURE. 39 CX<^v t-\JJ.,-\^ c/S' H -\>^„i^- v"^ OHwVO c^ espouse, for, after all. such an authority, if attainable, is not only the most legitimate, but at the same time also the most trustworthy. In the first place, the age which Job is said to have attained to places him in the patriarchal times. According to ch. xlii. 16, Job is said to have lived " a hundred and forty years after bis trial," and supposing he was forty_years old when his trial commenced, and it cannot be said^lRat this number is too high, for Job had already seven sons and three daughters, and the sons, according to ch. i. 4, had already separate establishments of their own, so that the age of Job, at the lowest computation, would have been 180 years when he died. This would place him in the patriarchal times, for Abraham lived 175 years, Isaac 180, and Jacob 147 years. This is somewhat confirmed by the tradition — if any confidence can be placed in it — which is contained in the apocryphal addition which is appended in the Septuagint version, according to which Job dwelled in the land of Uz, between the borders of Edom and Arabia, and that he was before called Jobab, arid was the son of Zerah, one of the sons of Esau, (according to this he would have been one of the kings of Edom, see Gej. xxxvi. 34,) and that his wife's name was Anan, and his mother's name Bozrah. A similar account is given at the end of the Arabic version of the book ; they are so alike, that they appear to be copies of one another. We can hardly attach any greater importance to this tradition than that it shows that the prevalent opinion when these versions were made was, that Job lived about the time of Jacob, Secondly, according to ch. i. 5, Job ofliciates as the priest of his family, like the other patriarchs. This he could not have acceptably done after the regular institution of the priesthood, and the setting apart of one place where the sacrifices could only be offered. Thirdly, the utter absence of any allusions in the book to the bondage of the Israelites in Egypt, and their miraculous deliverance, seems almost in itself to be a conclusive evidence that the book must have been written before that time. The events connected with the bondage and the deliverance, the miracles performed during the wandering in the wilderness, the taking possession of the piomised land ; all these were ' ibjects which would have afforded powerful arguments as co the merciful and mysterious dealings of God with man, and it is hardly conceivable that Job or his friends should not have freely di*awn from this bountiful source some of their most cogent argumc.:ts if the Pentateuch had already existed, in the same manner as all later Biblical writers have done. Dr. Hales has attempted, by astronoroicai calculations, to fix ^ the exact time of Job s trial at 184 years before the birth of * \ Jf^ t^^ ^0 &»-.'•' '>ev-> / Oatv 0.^ 'y. c^o^y'D "t-v r ,\?>y'^~^'^ ) tr^' %^ •0-^ J p 1> It i: : 8 i li ■ i .IS i : , i 40 HISTORY OF HEBREW LITERATURE. (/y\>^^r-M. \ Abraham. (See Hales's Chronology, vol. 2 pp. 55 to 57, 2nd edition.) Now, although so many eminent writers persistently main- tain a late origin, yet they have really not advanced one single argument to controvert the opinion of its having been written before the time of Moses, which does not crumble to pieces at the mere touch. We are told,f or instance, that Job speaks of writing, whereas they affirm that the art of vinting was not knowr until a much later period." How do they know this ? From what source could they have drawn their information ? We think we have already in the preceding pages conclusively shown that the art of writing must necessarily have been practised in the very oarliest times, and that in the time of Moses, there were already men who made ivriting a profession. Again, they assert that " there are indications of the author of the book of Job having copied from the Psalms and Proverbs ;" but how do they know that David and Solomon did not copy from or imitate the book of Job ? Indeed, the only plausible objection that we know of which, as yet, has been advanced is the mentioning of the Chaldeans in ch. 1, whereas, in Hebrew history they only fi^-st appear about 770 B.C. But this objec- tion will at once disappear when it is taken in consideration that in Gen. xxii. 22, among the sons of Nahor we find the name TffiS (Ghesed) fi-om whom sprung the D''TC53 {Chasdim) the Chaldeans, which clearly proves their very early existence. The descendants of Chesed for a long period led a predatory life, making excursions into the neighbouring deserts, and, according to classical writers, even into more distant regions (See Xenoph Cyr. III. i. 34 ; Anab IV. iii. 4.) They are spoken of by the Greek writers as an uncultivated tribe of mountaineers, brave and fond of freedom, and M. Renan speaks of them as " redo lite s dans tout r Orient pour leurs brigandages, "being feared in all the East on account of their robberies." It is precisely as such roaming jilunderers that they are spoken of in Job i. 17, where they are represented as foicibly carryir- off the camels and killing the servants who had charge of whem, Thus, the very argument which has been urged nga'nst the great antiquity of the book of Job, actually testifies to its anti(iuity, for it shows that the book must have been written at a period when the Ghaldear • were yet an " uncultivated ' predatory tribe, and not a great . id highly cultivated nation, such as they appear in later histoiy. There are other arguments which may be adduc2d from the book of Job strongly arguing in favour of the j;reat anti(|uity of the book, but those we have advanced are quite sufficient k^ outweigh the objections brought forward by the writers main- taining the ther^ry of a later origin. HISTORY OF HEBREW LITERATURE. 41 The opinions that the book was written during the Baby- lonian exile, or as those who hold more extreme views recklessly maintain, even after that time, are sufficiently controverted by the references made to it in the Old Testament. In the Ps. cvii. 42, the second part of the verse is evidently a quotation from Job, v. 16. The Psalmist's words are : "The righteous shall see it and rejoice : And all iniquity stops her mouth." The passage in Job reads ; "And there is hope for the poor, And iniquity stops her mouth. " Jeremiah, in ch. xx. 14, evidently imitates Job, ch. iii 3, in cursing the day of his birth. Jeremiah says : " Cursed be the day wherein I was born : The divy wherein my mother bare me, let it not be blessed." Job says " Let the day perish wherein I was born, And the night in which it was said, a man child is conceived." In the Lamentations of Jeremiah there are several pas- sages which are evidently in imitation of the book of Job. Compare, for example, Lamentations iii. 7, 9, with Job xix. 5. In Lamentations the passages read : " He hath hedged me about that I cannot go out ; He made my chain heavy " (v. 7.) " He hath enclosed my ways with hewn stones ; '* ' He made my ways crooked. " (v, 9. ) v.. In Job the passage reads : /, ; * , ' ' He hath hedged in my way that I cannot pass ; And upon my paths he hath placed darkness. " Ezekiel mentions Job in connection with Noah and Daniel, as examples of righteousness. But, further, the language employed in the book of Job in itself furnishes conclusive proof that the book of Job could not have been written as late as the Babylonish captivity, since it is altogether free from those Chaldaisms which are found in the books written at that period. Eichhorn, late Professor of Oriental Literature at the Uni- versity of Gbttingen, one of the most determined rationalistic writeis of this century, remarked : " Let him who is fit for 26 • *fi| li I ! 'T 1:'!! ;:i I ill 42 HISTORY OF HEBREW LITERATURE. IL a- f I such researches, only read first, a writing tainted with Aramae- I isms, and next the book of Job : they will be diverging as eaat I and west. Equally conclusive is the poetical character and merit of the book. Here we find the pure poesy of nature not to be met with in any other sacred or secular composition. The bloom and freshness of youth displays itself in every page. Ewald, who is consideied one of the greatest Orientalists of this age, though he himself refers the book to the 7th century before the Christian era, about the reign of Manasseh, is yet compelled to admit that "The high skill displayed in this book cannot be well expected from later centuries when poetry had by degrees generally declined, and particularly in the higher art required by large compositions ; and language so concise and expressive, as that of our author, is not found in writings of late times." Much more reasonable is the theory which places the com- position of the book in the time of David or Solomon, yet the /'L^ arguments we have adduced in favour of a greater antiquity argue with equal force also against this theory. The Arabic .. ^y-^ element in the book itself points to an earlier period. This "* subject will, however, be more fully treated in the commentary on the book of Job. NATURAL HISTORY. From the very few references in Scripture bearing on the study of the science of natural history, it is impossible to form any adequate idea to what extent this study had been prose- cuted by the ancient Hebrews. No doubt the Scriptures fre- quently make mention of various kinds of animals, birds, insects, and plants, and not unfrequently even their habits are alluded to : nay more, in the poetical writings we find some of the sublimest figures drawn from the habits of animals and plants ; but all this does not necessarily indicate a profound knowledge of the science. The information may have been obtained more through careful observation than by scientific inquiry. Hence we find in Scripture that the figures are most frequently drawn from those animals and plants, &c., which were most common and best known. The lion, for example, of which there were several species, seems to have been very plen- tiful in Palestine, and this will account for the many beautiful and striking figures drawn from the habits of this animal, occurring in the poetical writings of the Old Testament. The patriarch Jacob, in blessing Judah, says : "A lion's whelp ia Judah : From the prey, my son, thou hast gone up ; He bowed, he crouched as a lion, And as a lioness ; who shall rouse him up T" Gen. zlix. 9. HISTORY OP HEBREW LITERATURE. 43 The lion being at once powerful, daring, and imposing, hence it has always been the emblem of warlike valour and strength among all eastern nations. In the blessing of Judah, the figures present to us a most graphic discription of the gradual growth of that tribe, in strength and power. At first, it will be seen Judah is compared to " a lion's whelp," indicat- ing its infancy, and probably refers to the time when the tribe first assumed the leadership of the other tribes. Next, he is compared to " a lion" that bowed and crouched down. The Hebrew word n''1&^ {aryeh) here employed, denotes a full grown lion, one that has obtained its full figure and strength. Ik this figure, we evidently have depicted the reign of David, who subdued many nations and became a mighty monarch, just as the lion is the monarch of the forest which all other animals dread and fear, he became the terror of his enemies. Lastly, Judah h compared to "a lioness," which, satiated with her prey, composecMy lies down in her den, but whose rest, ei ~>ecially when with her young, no one may disturb without suffering for his temerity. This figure evidently portrays the peaceful reign of Solomon, who in calm repose enjoyed with the whcie nation, the fruit of David's victories; but who would have dared to disturb that repose ? It is necessary to observe here, that the Hebrew word i^'^^b {f^O'Vi) in the above passage is, in the English version, rendered by " old lion ;" but Bochart, who is a standard authority upon the natural history of the Bible, pro- perly regards it to mean the lioness, and not the male lion. Gesenius too, assigns several cogent reasons for adopting the same view, as for instance, " it being coupled with other names denoting a lion, where it can hardly be a mere synonym. That the passages in Job iv. 11, xxxix. 39, and others accord much better with the lioness than with a lion." In ieed, the same word occurs with but a slight diff'erence in the vowel points, in Ezek. xix. 2, where it must mean a lioness, and is so rendered in the English version. " And thou shalt say. What is thy mother ? a lioness : she lies down among lions." In Psalm x. 8, 9, (Eng. ver. 9, 10,) the Psalmist beautifuU}'^ compares the wicked person, watcliing for an opportunity to accomplish his wicked design, to a lion lurking in his den for a favourable moment to spring upon his victim. In Jer. xlix. 19, we read, "Behold he shall come up like a lion from the swelling of Jordon against the habitation of the strong." Nebuchadnezzar, King of Babylon, is here under the figure of a lion who has been inhabiting the thick forest of reeds, willows, and various shrubs which cover the banks of the river, but who is driven from his lair by the overflowing waters, represented as proudly marching against Judah. As the roaring ot the lion ia terrible, and apt to inspire with f . i!i' i: •<^ ji - 1 Hi ill : m ■ } '•''•im t^. I>11M 44 HISTORY OF HEBREW LITERATURE. u >• ' ii ' fear, hence it is said, that " The King's wrath ia as the roaring of a lion, but his favour is as the dew upon the grass." (Prov. xix. 12.) The figures drawn from the strength and habits of the lion are, indeed, very numerous throughout the whole of the Old Testament." Serpents are still very plentiful, and quite a number of species are to be found in Pale.stine. Those commonly called the house snakes are especially very plentiful, but fortunately are (juite harmless, going in and out of the houses as if they were the proprietors. But there are also a variety of very venomous snakes to be met with. These must formerly have been far more plentiful than they are now, for in the Talmud there is a warning not to drink water which had been standing in a vessel uncovered. {Terumoth VIII. sec. 4.) The force of this warning will be seen from an occurrence which happened at Tiberias, and is mentioned by R. Joseph Schwarz, who was for sixteen years a resident in the Holy Land. " A person in Tiberias drank some water from a vessel which had not been covered, and was soon afterwards a corpse. It had, no doubt, been poisoned by a serpent, which had drunk from the same." (Descript Geography of Palestine, p. 294.) The serpents being so very common and dangerous, it is no wonder that we find in the poetical portions of the Old Testa- ment so man}' beautiful figures drawn from the habits and dangerous nature of thtse reptiles. We will here give a few very beautiful examples : Jacob, in his prophetic blessing of the tribe of Dan, Gen. xlix. 17, says : " Dan shall be a serpent by the way, ^ , ;, A viper in the path. That biteth the heels of the horse, / So that the rider falleth backward. " Now, in order to be able to understand and appreciate fully the beauty of this figure, it is necessary to take into considera- tion the position of the portion of the Holy Land which fell as an inheritance to this tribe. The territory of Dan was bounded on the south by Simeon, on the north by Ephraim, on the east by Benjamin and Judah, whilst on the west it bounded by the country of the Philistines. This close proximity to their implacable enemies kept this tribe in constant warfare, for the Philistines took advantage of every favourable opportunity to harass them in the hope of regaining] at least some of their lost territory. This constant warfare with the Philistines will explain many circumstances in the history of Samson, who belonged to this tribe. The territory of the tribe of Dan, though small, was exceedingly fertile ; and the people gave themselves HISTORY OF HEBREW LITERATURE. 42^ up to the lucrative pursuits of commerce and agriculture. Engrossed with these occupations, they seemed to have lost all their former energy and valour, and we may say even their patriotism, for when in the time of Deborah the most extraordi- nary dangers threatened the nation, they shirked their obliga- tion in assisting their brethren, which made Deborali exclaim, "and why did Dan remain in ships ?" (Judg. v. 17.) But what the tribe of Dan lacked in valour and numerical strength to cope with the powerful enemy, was amply made up for by their cunning. By cunningly devised stratagems they repelled the invasions of the Philistines, and heKl their ground against them. Hence Dan is aptly compared to a viper or cerastes, IB'tfi'ttJ (shephiphon,) which lurks in the sand, frequently in the tracks of wheels, and which on account of its grey colour is not easily seen, but suddenly darts forth, and attacks with a deadly bite anything that comes near it. So deadly has the bite of this serpent been considered among the ancients, that they superstitiously believed, that if a man on horsebnck was to kill one with a spear, " the poison would run up the weapon, and kill both horse and rider." (Pliny viii. 33. See also the references given in Gesenius's Thes). The exploits of Samson furnish striking examples of the cunning devices by which he constantly inflicted heavy losses upon the Philistines. Though he judged Israel for twenty years, there is no single instance recorded of his appearing as the leader of an army of his countrymen ; his conquests, were entirely made by stratagem and personal exertions. A striking example of the artful mode of warfare carried on by the people of Dan is recorded in Judges xviii. As the terri- tory originally assigned to Dan proved too small for its large population, and there being no possibiiitj'' of extending its territory, as it was on three sides bounded by other t'-ibes, and on the fourth b}- the Philistines, who were too powerful for them ; a portion of the tribe determined to seek for a suitable settle- ment in the far north. For this puri)Ose they sent five spies, who came to the city Laish, whose inhabitants were Sidonians, a quiet, inoffensive people, and who having no enemies near them, and trusting in the protection of Sidon, thought them- selves perfectly secure. The spies soon perceived that there was a favoui-able opportunity of taking the place by surprise, as Sidon was too far away to render a \y assistance ; they therefore returned to their brethren, and reported what they had seen, urging them to go up against the people : that the land was very good and large, and that the people " dwelled carelessly." Accordingly they .sent six hundred armed men,^ who surprised the city, smote its inhabitants, and burned the city. Here we have the viper lurking in the path, inflicting a deadly blow on the unsuspecting victim. i I Hi , -I i I iii : *^'^!l 46 HISTORY OF HEBREW LITERATURE. Those of the tribe of Dan who took up their abode in this remote northern district, built a city and called its name " Dan, after the name of their father," which gave rise to the familiar proverbial expression, " from Dan to Beersheba." (Judg.xx.l,) indicating the extent of the Promised Land, Beersheba, (i. e,, the well of the oath,) being situated in the southernmost part of Canaan. The city of Dan became afterwards noted for the worship of the golden calf which Jeroboam set up, (see 1 Kings xviii. 29, 30, 31,) and this leaning towards idolatry gradually led to pri- vate and social intercourse between the Philistines and the Danites, which resulted in the tribe sinking into such utter insignificance, that its name was altogether omitted in later enumerations of the tribes. (See 1 Chron. iv. and following chapters, and Rev. vii.). Another beautiful figure, drawn from the serpent, we have in Isa. xiv. 29 : , 'i i :.i^n " Rejoice not, Fhilistia all of thee, Because the rod of thy smiter is broken : For from the serpent shall go forth a viper, And its fruit ia a fiery Hying serpent." The Philistines had been subdued by Uzziah, {i. e., might of Jehovah) King of Judah, but during the corrupt and weak reign of king Ahaz, they revolted and conquered some cities in the southern part of the kingdom. Over this conquest the Philistines naturally greatly rejoiced, hence the prophet in this prophecy declares that they should have no cause to rejoica that they had for a time thrown oft' the yoke of the king of Judah, since there soon will spring up in Judah a far more formidable and dangerous enemy than any of their former enemies, and that tlie chastisement which he would deal out would be much severer than the\' had yet experienced. And this prophecy was soon after its delivery literally fulfilled. We are told in 2 Kings xviii. 8, that Hezekiah, the son of Ahaz, " smote the Philistines, even unto Gaza and the borders thereof, from the tower of the watchmen to the fenced city." Uzziah, therefore, was the rod that smote them, and is also compared to a serpent, from whom should spring "a viper," yea, even the most danger- ous " fierj"^ flying serpent," that is, Hezekiah, As there are no traces now of the existence of any such " fieiy flying serpents" as here mentioned, many have conjec- tured that it is a mere "fictitious creature." But why should the prophet introduce in connection with two real species of serpents a fictitious creature, especially as there are several s j>ecies of the most deadly serpents quite common in Palestine which he could have mentioned instead. Hence, others have supposed And the HISTORY OP HEBREW LITERATURE. 47 that the Jlying lizard (draco volang) which is plentiful in Asia is meant. But this is altogether out of the question since theso lizards are perfectly harmless. It is sometimes called the flying lizard of Java, and mostly found upon fruit trees, it feeds upon flies and other small insects, and does no mischief in any respect. The " fiery flying serpent," on the contrary, when- ever it is spoken of in Scripture, is represented as exceedingly venemous, as indeed the name imparts n"\'Q5 {Saraph) i. e., fiery, burning, from the great fever which follows the bite, and not from the colour of fire, as some have supposed. The flying serpents are again mentioned ch. xxx. 6, and the wilderness oi Arabia is named there as their home, and this agrees with the account given by Herodotus who relates that such serpents flew every year from Arabia into Egypt, and were there destroyed by the Ibis. Bochart too, one of the greatest authox'ities on the natural history of the Bible, and Oedmann, his selections from Natural History, have also collected in proofs that such serpents formerly existed, and mention authori- ties who have seen them in Egypt. That no such serpents are now to be found, is no argument whatever that they did not formerly exist. There are two classes of animals which always stand in danger of being sooner or later exterminated. Namely, those that may be used for food, as is evident from the strict game laws that exist almost in every civilized country, and those which are destructive or dangerous to human life. The more dangerous and destructive the animal is, the greater exer- tion will be made to exterminate it. The fox and the jackal, are also often alluded to in Scripture, and evidently were at one time plentiful in Palestine. These animals being very destructive, no doubt great exertion was made to exterminate them, in the same way as has been done in Europe and America. Hence whilst older travellers speak of foxes being very plentiful in the Holy Land, the more modern travellers say that he is now rarely met with. The jackals, however, are still very plentiful, and never go singly, but always in packs of thirty or forty, and when thus united they will attack the largest animals. They are very bold, and do not seem the least afraid, but will pursue their game to the very doors of dwellings. The eastern people have evidently looked upon the jackal as a mere species of the fox, for they speak of both by the same name. In the Old Testament however, we find two distinct terms for them, namely, the fox, called 53,'itl) {Shual,) i. e., the digger, so called from his making holes to hide or dwell in. Thus Oppiam : " Cunning he dwells in burrows deep." And the jackals called Q'^'^i^ (-^yiw,) the howlers, so called from :i ! 'J '5 Ml 'Mi m III 1 kM 48 HISTORY OF HEBREW LITERATURE. 1 i: 1 ■ : f 1 their hideous cry, or howl. The Hebrew term lyim, which u a plural form, is never used in the singular, a peculiarity which probably may bo accounted for from their being always seen in packs. Notwithstanding, however, there being two distinct terms, it is yet generally conceded that the term Shnal is used to denote both ; and several passages which we shall refer to decidedly favour this supposition, as also the term hj'ivi being only used in the plural. In Psalm Ixiii. 11, (Eng. vers. v. 10,) we read, " They ahull fall by the sword, Tlipy shall be a portion for foxes. " Now, although foxes will prey on human carcases, yet this is more especially the case with the jackals. The most putrid substance is greedily devoured by them. They visit the graveyards, and with their feet .scratch up the new made graves and devour the corpses. In those parts of the countries where these animals abound, the precaution is generally taken to mix thorns with the earth. They have often been seen to follow armies and caravans, and when no dead carcases of any kind are to be obtained they will devour with the greatest avidity anything made of leather. There can, therefore, be little doubt that by the Skualim, in the above passage, are meant jittc7i;«7s and not foxes as rendered in our version. In Neh. iii. 35, (Eng. ver. ch. iv. 3,) we read; " Now, Tobiah, the Ammonite, ivaa by him, and he said, even that which they build, if a fox go up, he shall even break down their stone wall." As in this passage the aptitude with which the fox or jackal digs holes is referred to, hence some have rendered here the Hebrew word Shual by fox and others by jackal, either rendering is suitable. In Sam. v. 18, the great desolation of Mount Zion is depicted by representing it to be the resort of the Shualim, and may either mean here foMes or jackals. In the Song of Solomon ii. 15, reference is made to the ravages which foxes commit in vineyards : " Take us the foxes the little foxes, that spoil the vines, For our vines have tender grapes." The fox's fondness for grapes is so well known, that there can be no doubt that in this passage ShualiTn denotes foxes. In Ezekiel xiii. 4, the cunning of the fox is referred to : " Like foxes in waste places, Are thy prophets 0 Israel. " There are inrmmerable well attested anecdotes recorded illustrative of the cunning of the fox. The difficulty of setting HISTORY OF HEBREW LITERATURE. 49 escaj)ii.p trapa so that they may not bo detected by that animal is well known. It has been seen to approach hares feeding in the field with a slow, limping motion, with its head near the ground pre- tending to eat clover until it was close enough to be sure to secure its victim. It has also been known to simulate death, when caught in a place where there was no possibility of its escaping, and allow itself to be roughly dragged about without showing tho least sign of life, until an opportunity offered itself for By the " prophets," who, in the aliove pas.sago are aptl}i com- pared to foxes, are meant the false teachcr.s, who, by their hj-pucrisy deceive the people. They are in the New Testa- ment spoken of as " wolves in sheep's clothing." In the above passages we have similes drawn from the habits of foxes and jackals, we must now refer to a passage which contains mj simile, but where these animals were made the instiunients of indicting severe loss on the Philistines. The passage is recorded in Judges xv. i, 5, " And Samson went and caught three hundred foxes, and took torches (or fire brands) and turned tail to tail, and put a torch in the nudst between the two tails. And when he had set the torches on fire, he let them go into the standing corn of the Philistines, and burned up both the shocks, and also the standing corn, with the vine- yards and olive trees." Few Scripture narratives have been subject to more banter and ridicule at the hand of the opponents of the Bible, than the narrative contained in the foregoing passage. " Where," they ask, with a somewhat triumphant air, " could Samson have obtained so many foxes in such a short time, as it is a well- known fact that the fox is rarely met with in Palestine ? And then, su|)pobing he could have caught this large number of foxes, how could he in so short a time do all that is stated in the narrative, namely, tie SOO foxes in pairs, then tie on 150 torches, then light these torches and send them off all at once ? This sim])ly involves an impo.ssibility." These objections are by no means new, they have already been urged in the last century, for *Kennicott, the eminent Biblical scholar', and others, have proposed a new rendering of the passage in order to obviate the alleged difticulties. Accord- ing to their rendering, Samson took three hundred sheaves of corn and turned them end to end, and put a fire-brand between the two ends, and when he had set the brands on fire, he sent * Benjamin Kennicott was bom at Totnesa, in Devonshire, on April 4th, 1718. He was educated at Oxford, where he highly distinguished himself, and was afterwards elected a Fellow of Exeter College. In 17()7 he was appointed Radcliff librarian, and in 1770 Canon of Christ Church, Oxford. He died in September, 1783. 26 r ' ll: ?^ '( il f J I ' t. 1 1 . ^'W : .. f |w ' : 'iM ' "'ft 1 ' ' r, ! 'i iiil ;! ' il h ■: m HISTORY OF HEBREW LITERATURE. the fire into the standing corn of the Philistines. It is not a little sui-prising that a scholar like Kennicott should have coun- tenanced Huch an absurd interpretation, and the only way it can possibly be accounted for is, that his knowledge of Hebrew, like [hat of others who have adopted this rendering, could only liave been of a very superficial character, or that in the anxiety <■" overcoming the fancied difficulties, they have adopted this forced rendering without giving it much thought. In the first place, the Hebrew verb ^3^ (lachad), is never used simply in the sense to take or get, but always in the .sense to catch, to take by ansault, its use, therefore, in connection with skeaves, would be altogether out of place, for in such a connection the ordinaiy verb npb (Mkaoh) i. e., to take, would have been employed. Secondly, it is altogether impossible to force the meaning of sheaves on the word tD'^bi'T'JJ {shitalim,) it has l)een I'endei-ed/oa-es, or jackals, in all the versions, and we venture to say, that there is not a Hebrew scholar to be found now who would render it otherwise. Kennicott says : " There is another word ^Jti (shoal,) F/ural Qib^'ID {sheal'mi,) which denotes handfaU or sheaves of corn, and that seems to be the word which is used ill the passage under consideration, though it differs slightiy in its orth >graphy from the worl in the text. No doubt there is such a worti, denoting the hollow of the hand, or handfah, but never sheaves of corn, HB Kcmiicott will have it. This is very easily proved by referring to the other passages where it occurs. The word occurs altoirether onlv three times in the Old Testa- merit, namel}', Is. xl. ] 2, where it is rendered " the hollow 01" his hand ;" 1 Kings x.x. 10, where it is rendered " handiujs ;" Ezek. xiii. 19, where it is again rendered by "handfnls.'" From these passages it is clear, that tsie word in the singular (h;uotes the hollo} v ot the hand, and in the plural, as much as can be held in the lif>ilow of the hand, lience ho/udfuls Thi/re is not the slightest ground for supposing the word denotes aJso shf^aces. The Hebrew word for sli.eaves, or bundles of eorn,'iii Q'^!>2b55 {(ilMinmiru). See Gen. xxxvii. 7; Ps. cxx i. ertainly \w up, i" passage lupplying Iconiplete the sense, the common usage of the language is preserved, for it is by no means an uncommon occurrence of a word expressed in the first clause being omitted in the second where it has to be supplied. But many truuslators have disregarded this common usage here, and have rendered the passage differently. Thus, for example, Luther has rendered, " and (fa8se)i) lay hold of his tongue with a cord." And so also, in the Jewish German vei'sion. Ewald and others render " and (einklemmen) hem in with a cord his tongue." Rosemiiller and others, (einsevkcn) "insert a cord in his tongue." Jlahn and others, "and maim [Idhmen) his tongue," &c. The verb 3?ip;2Jy| (tashkid) however^ simply signifies, to sink down, to let down, and all the other renderings are not supported by the scriptural usage of the verb, and are mere conjectures. It will be seen that the render- ing which we have given is like that of the English version. The second clause evidently refers to a different mode of taking the Leviathan in water, than the mode esj)res.sed in the first clause " with a hook." Herodotus expressly asserts *' that one of the modes by which the crocodile was sometimes taken in his time, was by means of a hook which was baited with a dog's chine, and thrown into the midst of the river. " Can'st thou put a cord in his nose ? And with a ring pierce his cheek ? " (v. 26, Eng. vers. ch. xli. 2.) This verse has reference to keeping the Leviathan captive in the water, by putting a ring through his cheek, and securing him with a rope. The Hebrew word 'l)3;:i55 {Agmon) denotes a reed or rush, hence also a rope made of twisted reeds. Pliny says, that the Greeks at first made their ropes of rushes, and no doubt the Egyptians did so likewise. The Egyptians even were accustomed to make boats of the reed papyrus which they used on the Nile. Isaiah speaks of them, ch. xviii. 2, rendered in our version " vessels of bullrushes." " Will he make many supplications to thee ? Or will he speak soft words to thee ? " — (v. 27.) That is, when thou hast taken Leviathan, will he with many supplications and sol't words entreat thee for mercy ? " Will he make a covenant with thee ? That thou wilt take him for a servant for ever? " — (v. 28.) This verse is a continuation of the preceding, or will he make any offer to render to thee perpetual service and obedience ? *' Can'st thou play with him as with a bird? And bind him for thy maidens ? " — (v. 29.) r\ ■^ •H ' t 60 HISTORY OF HEBREW LITERATURE. I!! ", As much as to say, " Art thou able to tame the crocodile so that thou canst play with him as if it were a bird, or bind him so that he may become the amusement of thy maidens, without any danger of being harmed ?" "Will the conipanieB of vierchnnlo drive a bargain for him ? Will the Canaanites divide him among themaelves ? "- (v. 30.) The import of this verse evidently is, whether the crocodile is an article of commerce ? By the companies are meant the caravans who come from distant countries to trade in Egypt. The Hebrew word tD'^"l3n {cftdbbarim) properly denotes com- paniona, but here used in the sense of companions in travelling, nence caravans. By "Canaanites" is probably to be under- stood here, those who come by water from T3're and Zidon for the purpose of trading. In our version it is differently render- ed : "Shall the companions make a banquet of him ? Shall they part him among the merchants ? " Luther has rendered the verse: "Do you think the companions will cut hiai in pieces, that he may be divided among the merchants ? " The render- ing in the Septuagint, the Chaldee version, and the Vulgate, conveys the idea of the companions making a feast over hira, namely, after they have successfully captured him. This ren- dering is also adopted by Rosenmiiller and Gesenius, though the latter is not at all satisfied with it. The different render- ings have originated from there happening to 1 e three distinct verbs of the form J-QJ (karah); one signifying to buy, to drim a bargain ; another oenoting to give or prejxire afeast,&nd still another, having the sense, io dig, to bore, from which Luther has obtained his rendering, by translating the verb freely " cat to pieces." In all these translations by "compani(ms" must be understood those who were engaged in the capturing of the Leviathan. In the German translation made by Rabbi Solo- mon Hakkohen, and in use among the Jews, it is rendered ' Can the companies of merchants drive a bargain for him, can ti'aders divide him among themselves.": This rendering, it will be seen, is similar to that which we have given, and which is now ver}' generally adopted as conveying the most suitable meaning, and as agreeing best with the context. This formi- ^ 1^ 12.2 I, 40 2.0 1.8 1-25 1.4 11.6 = _ lllll^ -• 6" ► V] A '»/ ^> Photographic Sciences Corporation 23 WEST MAIN STREET WEBSTER, N.Y. 145S0 (716) 873-4S03 T"^ -^^ '■-!■'-»' T ,^r f '"'^ .v^ ^<^ fl f HISTORT OF HEBREW LITERATURE. carries with it the idea of setting oneself up in order *o oppose. It is so used again in Ps. ii. 2. " The kings of the earth set themselves up, And the nilers take counsel together Against Jehovah and his anointed." " Who has first rendered me a service, that I should repay f Everything beneath the whole heaven is mine. " (v. 3. ) The sentiment in this verse is intended to tench Job how unjust his conduct was in repining at God's dealings with him. All that he had lost had been a gift to hir^ from God, for which he had rendered no previous service, God had, therefore, merely taken what he had gratuitously given. He is all- sufficient and independent and hence cannot be indebted to any one for His services ; and being the proprietor of all things, has consequently a perfect right to give and to take away as it seems good to Him. Hence, the apostle Paul says : " Or who had first given to him, and it shall be recompensed unto him again? l^or of him, and through him, and to him are all things : to whom be glory for ever." (Romans xi. 35, 36.) Submissive resignation, therefore, to the heavenly Father's will, is the duty of every reasonable creature. " 1 will not keep silent in respect to his parts, And what is to say of the strength and the beauty of his frame." (v. 4.) The description of the Leviathan is far from being complete, yet, the wonderful structure of this terrible creature has not even been touched upon, and, therefore, the mighty creative power of God is not yet fully displayed. Hence, in order to impress Job with a deeper sense of that power, and make him feel the utter insignificance of man, God addresses the following questions to him, touching the various admirable particulars in the formation of Leviathan : " Who dares to remove his outer garment ? In his double jaws who dares to enter T " (v. 5.) The phraseology in this passage is very perplexing. The drift of it seems to be plain enougn, the difficulty is in render- ing the peculiar expressions of the original into another lan- guage, and it is, therefore, no wonder that so many different renderings are given. The literal rendering of the first clause of the passage would be : " Who can remove, (or make hire or uncover, or reveal or discover,) the face of his garment." What then are we to understand by " the face of his garment?" Evidently that part which is visible, and this can be nothing else than the coat of armour with which the animal is covered, and which, under certain circumstances, is proof against a HISTORY OF HEBREW LITERATURE. lb how t,h him. lod, for lerefore, ) 13 all- l to any ngs.haa ay as it Or who Qto him are all 35, 36.) Father's musket-ball. As this armour is the outer cover of the skin, we considered that "outer garment" would be the most proper, and at the same time the most intelligible rendering. At any rate, critics are generally agreed upon that the expression, "the face of his garment," refers to the coat of armour. By the "doable jaws" are evidently meant the two mon- strously gaping jaws, each of which being furnished with a single row of numerous large teeth which are conical. The distance of the jaws, when opened as wide as they can, will extend sometimes to fifteen inches and a half, large enough to take in the body of man. The meaning evidently is, who would have tho hardihood to expose himself to the danger of those two jaw:, furnished with such formidable rows of teeth ? We must observe here, that the Hebrew word 'm'y (resen), properly signifies a bridle, so that the literal rendering of the phrase would be his double bridle, as it is rendered in the English version, but as this would not afford a good sense, it is generally admitted by critics, that the word is here used to denote the part which receives the bridle. So the Greek word SaKivo^, a bridle, and also that part of the mouth of a horse where \e mouth-piece of a bridle rests. Likewise the German word Gehisa, teeth and also bridle bit. It is here rendered "jaws" by Gesenius, Bochart, Ewnld, Hahn, and all noted cricics. In the English version the verse is rendered, " Who can discover the ihte of his garment? or who can come to him (or "within," as in the margin) with his double bridle." This rendering, although very nearly literal, is hardly intelligible. " The doors of his face who will open them ? Terror dwella ia the rowa (lit. circuit) of his teeth. " — (v. 6. ) The " doors of his face " are the powerful jawbones ; the second clause assigns the reason why no one ventui'es to open them, on account of the numerous and sharp teeth, which, according to some writers, are sixty in number. •• Majestic are the strong shields. Firmly joined together as with a seal." — (v. 7.) The "strong shields" are the large scales of equal size and of a square form which cover the back of the animal; they are disposed in parallel rows, and joined in such a manner as if they were sealed. " They are joined so rloae one npon the other, So that the air cannot come l^etweeu them." — (v. 8.) The scales are so closely joined that the very air cannot come between them. '; f'ti- » i: ■I if: lii ti HISTORY OF HEBREW LITERATURE. " They adhere one to another ; They hold together, they cannot be separated. " — (r. 9.) This verse is still a continuation of the preceding. The scales are so wonderfully disposed as if one depended on the othei*. so that they cannot be separated. " By his sneezings a light is caused to shine, And his eyes are as the eye-lashes of the uioming." — (v. 10.) When the crocodile sneezes in the sun-light, the water that is forced from his nose sparkles in the light, just as the rain- drops become illuminated in a sun-shower. The second clause contains a beautiful oriental figure; the Hebrew an, u HISTORY OF HEBREW LITERATURE. bers xi. 8, both are mentioned as being used by the people in grinding the manna in mills, or pounding it in a mortar. Each family possessed a mill, and as it was in daily use, it was un- lawful to take either of the stones in pledge. (Deut. xxiv. 6.) These mills were worked by two persons, generally women, who sat opposite to each other, and as the work was somewhat laboiious, and esteemed the lowest employment, it generally fell to the lot of the lowest maid servants of the house. In families weie there were female slaves, the grinding was always per- formed by them. Hence the prophet Isaiah in pronouncing God's judgment against Babylon, to indicate how great its fall nn 1 humiliation shall be, calls upon the tender and delicate daughter of the Chaldeans, who had been accustomed to the greatest luxuiy and enjoyment, to come down from her lofty seat, and take the mill-stones and grind meal, (Isaiah xlvii. 1, 2.) " At his rising the ipighty are afraid, From terrors, thr ' are beside themselves." — (v. 17.) When this terrible ere itura suddenly and unexpectedly rises out of the water, even the most courageous become terror stricken, for they know that no weapon will make any impres- sion upon him, since he is invulnerable in every part except his belly, and which is not easy to come at. The second clause has by some been rendered: "For terror they miss." That is, they become so terrified at the sight, that they lose all steadiness in their aim, and, consequently, miss what they aimed at. Now, although to miaa is one of the different significations which the verb ^^n (chata) has, yet as the verb is here in the Hithpael — i. e., reflexive conjugation, we think the rendering, they are beside themttelves, the most suitable, and, at the same time, the most expressive. The rendering given of the second clause in the English version, "by reason of breakings they purify themselves," is altogether unintelligible. " Does one assail him toith a sword, it makes no impression, The lance, the spear, and the harpoon /larms him not." (v. 18.) All ordinary pointed weapoas employed against other wild animals are of no avail against the crocodile; his impenetrable coat of mail is proof against them; travellers are generally agreed upon this point. •* He regarded iron as straw ; Brass as rotten wood. (v. 19.) The son of the bow {L e., the arrow) cannot make him flee, Sling stones are turned with respect to him into chaff." (v. 20.) It is he, feels the sling stones no more than if they were chaff. "Cudgels are regarded as stubble: ' And he merely laughs at the whizzing of the d*rt." (▼. 21.) BISTORT OF HEBREW LITERATUUR. 67 The last clause is rendered in the English version : " He laugheth at the shaking of the spear." This rendering is also quite admissible as the Hebrew word XD^l (radah) signifies both a shaking, and also a noise, and is adopted by many interpreters. More commonly, however, the word is here taken in the sense of noiae or sound, as being more expressive of the fearlessness of the crocodile. The strong figures employed in the above verses are intended to portray in a lively manner, his courage, during, and strength. In the fii-st clause of veree twenty, we have a beautiful Hebrew idiom which occurs frequently throughout the Old Testament, and we shall, therefore, take this opportunity of explaining it. Anything proceeding from, or being dependent u|)on another thing is frequently spoken of as being the son or daujhter of it Hence, an an'ow is called the son of the how, as proceeding from it when shot off. In Genesis xlix. 22, Joseph is called, "the son of a fraitful vine" — i. e., a branch of a fruitful vine ; but as the branch or twig proceeds from, and is dependent upon the parent stem, hence, according to the Hebrew idiom, it is, in the original, spoken of as the son of it. In the English version it is merely rendered " fruitful bough." In Job V. 7, sparks of the flame are spoken of as son of the Jlame, since they emanate from the flame. " Truly man is born to trouble, '' As the sons of the flame (t. e.. the sparks) fly upwards." In a translation these idiomatic expressions become neces- sarily lost. " Under him are sharp stones, He basks u/>on the flinty rocit a« upon mire." (v. 22.) .^^ The language in this verse is very obscure, and hence a variety of renderings of it are met with. It appears to us, however, that the proper import seems to be, that the crocodile can repose upon the sharp rock with as little concern as upon the soft mire. The belly of the crocodile, although penetrable by a bullet, and, perhaps, also by a sword, is yet hard enough as to be able to lie on sharp stones and rugged rocks without feeling any pain. In that part of the Nile where the cataracts are, and which the crocodiles mostly frequent, its bed is of granite marble, as is evident from the ridge of granite rocks which there runs across the channel, and is the cause of those falls of the water. (See Pocock's Description of the East, vol. I pp. 114, 115, 122.) At all events, in the above translation the rendering of some of the words is more in consonance w^ith the original than in the other readings, and the sense conveyed j at the same time, harmonizes more beautifully with the con- • 1 )i •■(' f i S:- m ['4 ■ ■; M 14; 68 BISTORT OF HEBREW LITERATURE. text. Whilst we have no doubt ourselves that the translation we have given, conveys the true meaning of the ori^nal, we will, nevertheless, give those readings which are at all worthy of notice in order that the reader may, in a measure, judge for himself. Ewald, Hahn, and other noted German interpreters, have rendered the verse as follows, or in a similar manner : " Under him are sharp (Seherben) poisberds, He draws {den apUzen SehUtten) the pointed sledge upon the mire." They explain the " sharp potsherds " to mean the sharp heavy scales upon the belly of the crocodile, which are smaller though no less sharp than those upon the back ; whilst the second clause they interpret, that " when the crocodile moves over the mire or soft ground, the scales of the belly makefurrom, which gives it the appearance as if a thrashing-sledge" (such as was used in ancient times,) '* furnished with pointed irons, had been drawn over it." This explanation of the passage appears to us very far fetched, even if we had any proof of the croco- dile making furrows upon the soft grouiid over which he muves. Dr. Harris and others nave rendered the verse. " His bed is the splinters of flint Which the broken rock scattereth on the mud." This is a very free translation, it conveys, however, the some idea as the rendering which we have given. In the Engli.sh version it is rendered, "Sharp stones are under him ; he spreadeth sharp pointed things upon the min." The rendering of the first clause, it will be seen, is precisely like our rendering, but the rendering of the second clause is not very clear, but probably is intended to refer to the scales upon the belly which the crocodile spreads upon the mire whilst in a reposing position. There are several causes that led to those different render- ings. In the first place, the use of the Hebrew noun iuin (cJieres), i. e., a potsherd, but which cannot be taken here in its literal sense, we have, therefore, regarded it as poetically used for pieces of stones, and so the translators of our authorized version, and similarly Dr. Harris and others. Ewald, and iHany of the German school, on the contrary, render it literally, but apply it to the scales upon the belly. Secondly, in the second clause there is an ellipsis of the nou% we have, therefore supplied the noun " rock" as forming the most suitable antithesis to " mire," and in acconlance with the prevailing usage in such cases, that the noun from the first clause, or one similar in sense, should be supplied if possibla BISTORT OF HBBRBW LITERATURE. e» Tbe remlerin^ in the authorized version "pointed things" is quite admissible, as the word thmg is quite a common ellipsis, only it Hhould have been printed in italics ; but as we have already stated, it renders the passage obscure. In the Jewish German version, which is, however, printed in Hebrew characters, the verse is lendered as follows: "Sharp pieces of stone lie beneath him, he makes his bed upon cutting flint like upon mire." This rendering coincides precisely with the rendering which we have given. Luther, in his German version, has rendered, " Under him lie sharp stones, he moves over the sharp rocks like over mire." " He caaseth the deep to boil aa a caldron. He maketh the aea like a pot of oiDtinent."-(v. 23.) In the first clause allusion is made to the violent agitation of the water, when a large crocodile dives to the bottom of it, and is here beautifully and appropriately compared to a boiling caldron or vessel. The figure is intended also to illustrate the immense force of the creature. Such images of comparing greatly agitated water to a boiling vessel, are very common among the poets. Thus, for example. Homer : ' tumultuous boil the waves ; M They toss, they foam, a wild confusiou raise. Like waters bubbling o'er the fiery blaze. " (Pope's Odyssey, b. xii. v. 235, &c. ) By " the deep " is evidently meant here, the deep places in the river. The second clause seems to refer to the strong scent of musk which the crocodile exhails, and which he thus imparts to the water when he plunges into it. The savages in some parts of Africa wear that part of the animal which contains the musk as a perfume about their persons, the scent apparently is agree- able to then. By " the sea " is here meant the river Nile. Both the Hebrews and Arabians were accustomed to speak of a large body of water as a sea, as the dead aea, the aea of Tibereaa, which are only great lakes. Hence this appellation was also extended to the Nile and to the Euphrates, probably on account of their periodical overflowing which then gives them the appearance of a large lake. {Compare Is. xix. 5 ; Nah. iii. 8 ; Jer. li. 36.) " He maketh the path to shine after him ; One might think the deep to he grey hairs." — (v. 24.) When the crocodile swims, his tale like a rudder, forms a trail of silvery foam which in appearance looks like grey hairs. I -^^ I ii 70 HISTORY OP HEBREW LITKRATURI. ' There is not upon earth hie like, Who it inaiitt without fear. At everything hiuh he boldly itarea, Hii ia king over all the haughty onea. -(V. 25, 26.) In order to complete our idea of thi.s roost terrible of all creatures, the description ciosfs with setting forth the three principal characteristics which distinjjnishes this crenture from all other animals. In the first place, that he has no equah ufwn earth, that is, in its attack or defence. Secondly, that h^ knows no fear. Tliis declaration has been objected to as being an over estimation of the fearlessness of the crocodile, since he has been known on the appronch of a ship, and when shot at, to plunge into the water. But this is only the case when he lays quietly basking, and not when in n position to seize his prey. Pococke and Norden state, that tho.se which they saw on the mud-islands, in the Mile, went slowly into the water at the approach of tin ir ships, and when shot at plunged in. This may be so, but the case would have been altogether diHcrent had any one of these creatures been in a situation for seizing his prey, he would then have set the crew of both vessels, and all their firearms, at detiance. Thirdly, he hokls in subjection the laryent and fiercest aninud by his superior power. Bochart adduces numerous proofs that the crocodile will boldly attack, and bring down with his tail, not only men, but camels, and even elephants and tigers when they approach the river. (Hieroz. p. ii. 790.) It often happens when it seizes a large wild animal that it meets with most desperate resistance, but it always con(^uers. Sometimes it happens that an animal will manage to escape out of its clutches wounded, and make off, the crocodile in that case always pursues it with all its might, and often seizes it a second time ; for, although appar- ently heavy, the crocodile runs with great celerity. In this manner, when in pursuit of a wounded animal, he has been seen over half a mile from the banks of the river. Though the strength of every part of the crocodile is very great, yet its principal instrument of destruction is its tail ; with a single blow it will overturn a canoe, and seize upon the poor man in it. There are even instances known of a man being taken out of a canoe in the sight of his companions without their being able to render any assistance, and, indeed, in times of inunda- tions, crocodiles have been known to ent-jr the cottages of the natives, and seizing the first living things they met with. Well, indeed, may the sacred writer say of the crocodile, that he knows no fear, and that " he is king over all the haughty ones." It will be .seen that the numbering of the verses, in the description of the Leviathan, is not the same as in the English version, this arises from the description in the original com- BISTORT OF HEBREW LITERATURE. n i of all e three ire from ds iijMn A knowt )eing an !e he has ot at, to I he lays tiis prey. T on the r at the n. This different »r seizing ssels, and ubjcdioii Bochart ly attack, iinels, and the river. ?s a large iance, hut m animal intl make bh all its :h appar- In this has been lough the yet its a single or man in taken out heir being it" inunda- tres of the Th. WeU. ., that he ;hty onea" les, in the le English inal com- mencing at chapter xl. 25, whilst in our authorized version it commences at chapter xli. 1, which is no doubt the proper division. Behemoth. As we have devoted mo much space to the elucidation of the description of Leviathan, it will, perhaps, not he out of place here to offer, nlso, a few brief explanatory remarkH upon the description given in Job xl. of the other remarkable atiiuial, the Behemoth. But before entering upon any conmients, it will first be necessary to inquire what is to be undevstootl by the term Behemoth. Upon thi.s point commentators are by no means agreed. The fiithers suppoised it to denote the devil, a great many ancient and niodt>rn writers, on the other hand, believed it to be the elephant. Sanctius, and some others, under- stood by it the ox, whilst the generallj' prevailing opinion, however, of the most eminent modern writers is that it is the kippopotamua. We think there can be not much difficulty in ascertaining which of these views is the correct one, lor the derivation of the name itself, as well as the descri|»tion of the animal to which no less than ten verses are devoted, unmis- takably point to the hippopotamus. Very many critics regard the term tn)pn2l (Behemoth) as a pluratia excellenticB of n73n3 (Behemah) i. e., a quadruped, a beast, and regarded that the plural form is indicating a large or remarkable beast. This suppo.sition, however, although from a philological point of view not incorrect, is by no means a likely one, as in that ca.se the term would be applicable to any large animal. Far more probable is the supposition, that Behemoth is merely a Hebraized form of the ii(,'yptian name P-ehe-mouth—i. e.,the water ox. (Hippopotamus amphibius), mentioned is Isaiah xxx. C, as the emblem of Egypt. It is by no means an uncommon thing to see the crocodile and hippopotamus, both being inhabitants of the Nile, represented as companions upon pictorial repre.sentations, and this shows the appropriateness of these two remarkable animals being here conjointly spoken of as illustrating the creative poiver of Qod. The description of the Behemoth commences ch. xl. 15, and is as follows : " Behold, now, Behemoth which I have mude with thee ; He eateth grass as cattle." (v. 15.) • ; The expression " with thee" does not mean here, near thee, or as Delitzsch explains it, "so that thou hast it before thee," but Hke. thyself ; as much as to say, behold, this great and I formidable Behemoth, is like thyself only the work of my hand. *i* ti i ! i i jl f ' f: : 72 HIHTORY OF HEBRBW LITERATURE. " He eated grass like cattle," the food of the hippopotaiaui consiMts chiofl}' of plants which grow in shallow water, or about the margin of rivers or laxes. Ho eats the grass as neatly as if it were cut with a scythe. In one of the plates in the antiquities of Hercjlanium, he is represented in the very act of feeding on plants. (Vol. 2 p. 205.) . " Behold, now, hii itrength m in hit loini, And his power in the mntolea of his belly." (▼. 16.) This verso refers to his powerfully built body, and hiu prodigious strength. " He bendeth hia tail like a cedar, The unewM of hia thigh are interwoven." (v. 17.) The simile of the first clause is by no means clear, and hence it has been explained in different ways. Rosenmiiller r.nd others, interpret that " he bends his tail although it is like a cedar, strong and stiff." In a similar manner Delitzsch : " He bendeth his tail like a cedar branch," and explains, that it looks like a stiff bone, yet he can bend it like an elastic cedar branch. Heiligstudt and others, explain, that if bent, it still remains stiff, like a cedar bent by the wind." Ewald renders : " He bends his tail as if it were a cedar." Ilahn and others translate: " He ."trctches, (or extends) his tail like a cedar," it is, he makes it stiff like a cedar when he extends it. Against this ren'^eriug is, that the verb Vgn (chaphetz) here employed, does not mean to stretch out, to extend, but to bend. The interpretation given by Rosenmiiller and Delitzsch seems to be the most plausible one. The context certainly indicates that the passage refers to the exercise of some physical power. The tail of the hippopotamus is very short in comparison to the size of its body, and amonj,' the Arabians there exists a notion that a stunted tail is a mark of strength of an animal We have no indications whether this notion prevailed also among che Hebrews. " Hia bonea are Hie atrong piecea of braaa, Yea hia bonea are like bara of iron." (v. 18.) ^In the original the words for "bones" are different, in the first clause T»)33;5 (atsatnav) is employed, which probably is used here to express the small hones, which are said to be " like strong pieces of brass ;" whilst in the second clause the word T^oili geraniav) is used, which most likely expresses thf larger bones. " He M the first of the ways of Ood, He that made Aim furnished him with a sword." (t. 19.) " The first" does not mean in respect of time, but in respect ol HISTORY OF HRBREW LITERATURE. 7H lear, and enmuller it is likti ich : " He ,t it looks M* branch, nains stiff, He bends translate , he makes tren'leriiig not vae&n tion given usible one. grs to the jopotamus i,na among is a mark lether this rank. By " the ways of God" is here to l)e understood, His creative acts, so that the first clause means, that the Behemoth is the first in rank among all the creatures which Ocd had created. The second clause is explanatory of the first, setting forth in what that superiority exists, namely, that the creator had furnished him with a " sword," which is here figuratively used to express his terth. The teeth of the hippopotamus are exceedingly sharp and strong. We have already stated that he eats grass and corn as neatly as if cut with a scythe ; he will even bite a stem of considerable thickness through with great ease. The animal is generally inoflfensive when left Mone, it never attacks mariners in their boats as they go up or down the river; but should (hey accidentally strike against it, they run affreat risk of being at once sent to the bottom. Dampier relates of a mariner who had seen " one of these animals open its jaw, and seizing a boat between its teeth, at once bite and sink it to the bottom." The same mariner also related that " upon another occasion one placed itself under one of our boats, and, rising under it, overset it, with six men who were in it ; who, however, happily received no other injury," We may observe here, that Ewald and Vaihinger render the second clause of the verse : " Still his Creutor guides his sword." They explain that " God has made the devouring mouth of this most wonderful animal innocuous, guiding it so that it cannot do any harm." Against, this rendering and explanation may be urged, that " the devouring mouth of this animal very oiten does a good deal ofhann. An example we have above given, if there is any truth in the statement of the mariner. But whether that statement is true or not, certain it is beyond a doubt, that this animal often leaves the water by night and makes inroads upon cultivated fields devouring the crops ; and a3 it is a gregarious animal, the havoc that a herd of them makes is very great, and the helpless natives who see their crops destroyed dare not resist the invaders. The mode they generally adopt to frighten them away is, to light a fire, beating drums, or tin vessels, and shouting at the same time with all their might, and as the animal is very timorous on land, they generally succeed in their endeavours. In those parts where the cultivation of the land is carried on, a bitter war of extermination is carried on against them ; and this will account why this animal is no longer found in Lower Egypt, whilst it is still plentiful further up the Nile. " Yea, the hills {amish food for him. And all the beasts of the field may play there," — (v. 20.) 99 i ' ■ 'i a i i. 1 .i 1' i ■ 1^ : ri kl i I ;. I L m iF 1! i li^' 74 HISTORY OF HEBREW LITERATURE. When the food in the lower regions should happen to fail, though a cumbrous animal, with small feet so that his belly nearly touches the ground, he still manages to climb up the hills in search of herbage. The second clause describes how harmless the animal is, if left alone, the beasts of the field may sport about him whilst grazing. •' Under the lotus trees he lieth down, In the covert of reeds and marsh. ' — (v. 21.) As the hippopotamus is exceedingly aquatic in his habits, he generally takes his rest in the covert of reeds and other water plants, but when grazing on land like other wild animals he seeks the shade of trees. In Egypt the lotus tree is taller and stronger than in Syria : its fruit, a small, yellow apple, is by the Arabians called dtlma, "the everlasting or perennial," for the fruit of the previous year only falls from the tree when that of the present year is ripe. In the English version the Hebrew word fi*>bi^S (Tseelim,) is rendered by " shady trees," and this rendering is also given in the Vulgate and the Syrinc versions, and has been adopted by many of the older Jewish and Christian interpreters. But there is certainly some difficulty presented in deducing that meaning from the Hebrew word, and as it only occurs in the above verse, and the following one, there is no opportunity afforded to see in what sense it is used in other places ; hence all eminent modern critics, guided by the Arabic meaning of the word, rendered it by " lotus trees or lotus bushes." The second clause of the verse is altogether fatal to the sup- position that the elephant is meant by the Behemoth, as some have supposed, for it could not be consistently said of that animal to have his place of repose, " In the covert of reeds and marsh." The favourite haunts of the wild elephant are in the depths of forests, especially in mountainous regions, and although he delights in entering the water, and frequently remains in it for a considerable time, he certainly does not lie down " in the covert of reeds and marsh " v/hen taking his repose. Indeed, from the apparent inflexibility of the limbs, originated the far prevailing idea among the ancients, which continued throughout the middle ages, that the limbs of the elephant are without joints, and therefore he could not lie down like other quadrupeds, but alw^ays sleeps standing or leaning against a tree. This notion is, of course, now altogether ex- ploded, still it is notwithstanding true, that he often does sleep standing or leaning against a tree or rock. " Lotus trees weave him his shelter, m:: The willows of the brook surround him." — (v. 22.) ii HISTORY OF HEBREW LITERATURE. 73 The intertwining boughs of the lotus trees furnish shade or shelter for him from the scorching sun. In the English version the first clause is freely rendered. " The shady trees cover him with their shadow," which certainly affords a good sense, but takes great liberty with the original text, and therefore has not been followed by many translators of the present day. The ren- dering of the noun fi'^b^S {tseelim), by "shady trees" instead of "lotus trees" might be regarded merely as a free rendering, but the rendering of the singular pronoun " his " by " their," 80 as to make it agree with " trees, " instead of with " shelter," is rather too much of a liberty to take. The second clause refers to the hippopotamus taking his rest among the willow trees which frequently grow very plen- tifully on the banks of rivers and in marshy places. Behold, if the stream is strong, he is not alarmed, Hq remaineth quiet although Jordan breaketh fourth at hia mouth. — {v. 23.) As the hippopotamus delights to live in water, he has be- 'lorae so accustomed to that element, that he does not heed the most noisy raging waters. As an example, the river Jordan is mentioned, for this river has at all times an extraordinary rapid current. The ordinary current is, however, yet greatly increased during the winter when swelled by the rains, so that it violently breaks over the banks of its narrow channel. Volney says, in regard to the river Jordan : " In winter it over- flows its narrow channel, and swelled by the rains, forms a sheet of water sometimes a quarter of a league broad, * * and its course is impetuous." It is said that the current is so strong, in many places, that even the best swimmer cannot bathe in it without endangering his life. In the neighbour- hood of Jericho the bathers tie themselves together with ropes to prevent their being swept off by the rajjidity of the current. No doubt the expression "although Jordan breaketh forth," alludes to the violent breaking of the waters of Jordan ever its banks. In the English version the verse is very strangely rendered, "Behold he drinketh up a river, and hasteth not : he trusteth that he can draw up Jordan into his mouth." It would be no easy task to show how the translators obtained this rendering from the original, and still greater v/ould be the task to give a satisfactoiy explanation of it. We may observe also, that the river Jordan is probably instanced in preference to any other rapid river, as it was in the neighbourhood of Job's country, and was therefore well known to him. " Can one take him with hia eyes open * - ' Can one pierce his nose with cords ? " — (v. 24.) ■" i' ■ U ml i ■ Sl i - -wi i 76 BISTORT OF HEBREW LITERATURE. I * § The description of the Behemoth appropriately closes with an allusion to the difficulty of capturing this monster. Neither open force, nor those stratagems generally employed in captur- ing other wild animals will avail here. The passage obtains additional force if taken as an ironical callenge addressed directly to Job, as much as to say, ■r,:.,\ ,:<; " Just catch hiin with his eyes open, :" ■■" Attempt to pierce his nose with cords." This verse also, like the preceding, has been made quite un- intelligible by the way it is rendered in the authorized version. " He taketh it with his eyes; his nose pierceth through snares." In the margin, however, it is rendered, " Will any take him in his sight, or bore his nose with a gin ? " This is decidedly a better rendering, though still admitting of improvement, Locusts. Of the insects the locusts are most frequently mentioned in the Old Testament, and this not only on account of their being the most destructive of all insects, and thus furnishing plenty material to the sacred poets, but also on account of four species having been permitted to be eaten under the Mosaic dietary laws. " These of them ye may eat, the locust (arbeh) after its kind, and the locust {solum) after its kind, and the locust (lihargol) after its kind, and the locust {chagav) after its kind." (Lev. xi. 22.) These are, no doubt, four different species of locusts, although according to our authorized version it appears otherwise, for the verse is there rendered " Even these of them ye may eat ; the locust after his kind, the bald locust after his kind, and the beetle after his kind, and ths grasshopper after his kind. As the sub-genera of the locust are very numerous, and the distinction often not very marked, it is not very easy to speak with certainty as U) the precise classification of the four species above mentioned, an approximate identification is all that can be reasonably expected. The name of the first species in the original is na"15^ {arbeh) and is derived from the verb t\'2'\ (ravah) to multiply or to be many, hence the derivation of the term refers either to the rapid increase, or to the moving in great numbers, or what is perhaps more likely, it includes both. The derivation unmistakably in this case points to the common migratory locust, (gryllus gregarius, Linn, or {acridiuvi migratorium.) These always move in stupendous swarms over various parts of Asia and in other parts of the globe. It was this species of locusts that constituted the eighth plague of Egypt, which, according to Exod. x. 14, surpassed in severity every visitation of the kind, that has ever happened or wil' Vulgate mngs \ Talmud The to the hi (lev from the complctel from the ' I in appeal spies iljat to Mosos I mie of UCluigdvii) I ^e Were ii 30 HISTORY OF HEBREW LITERATURE. 77 ever happen. " And the locusts went up over all ihe land of Egj'pt, and fested in all the boundaries of Egypt, a very heavy 'daytie; before them there were no such locusts as they, neither after thein shall be such." That is, of course, in point of number and deatimctiveness. It is this species which is also most frequently seer in Europe. The appropriateness of the derivation of the II rew term as above given will at once become! apparent when it is stated, that when breeding in the month of Octobei-, they make a hole in the ground with their tails, in which they lay 300 eggs which are united together in little masses. Neither frost nor rain, no matter how severe, or of how long duration, destroy these eggs ; they remain till spring, and are then hatched by the sun. The second species mentioned is in Hebrew called Q3?bD {Solam) i. e., the devonrer. The word occurs nowhere else in the Old Testament. We have, therefore, nothing to guide us in identifying this species. There are various conjectures offered, but none amounts to any certainty. According to the Talmudists it is a species " having a hump, but no tail." According to the Arabian writers, " a winged species" not eaten by the Arabs, because considered unwhoisome. According to the Jewish commentator Eben Ezra, " rockscaler." In the Vulgate rendered attacus, similarly in the Septuiigint, in the Authorized Version " bald locust." The third species called btllH {chargol). i. e., the runner or Imper. The same spies that were sent to search out the land of Canaan brought to Moses ; " and there we saw giants, the sons of Anak, ivhick come of the giants ; and we ',vere in our own eyes as [Chagtivim) locusts, (English version " grasshoppers,") and so we were in their eyes." Some interpreters have endeavored to 30 i ] |JiiM'"i^' 'il i plfi si -■•- 1 i ! 1 i ' '' 1 .1 \ I < i \ '* t 1 -n 1 1 ^^■ \ 78 HISTORY OF HEBREW LITERATURE. prove that the four different names indicate only four different stages in the d'Yelopment of the migratory /ocn«t, but the expressions " after its kind," which in each case follows the name, altogether precludes such a supposition Naturalists and travellers have furnished manj' .say the locust in the more advanced stage was devoured by fuil gnnvn ones. In our version the term is rendered by "caterpillar." "Awake j/r drunkards, and weep ; and howl, all ye drinkers of wiue ; fiecuuae of the new wiue, for it is cut off from your niouVi- For u nation is come upon nij' land, strong and without number, Whose teeth are the teeth of a lion, And it hath cheek teeth like (hat, of a lioness. It hath laid my vine waste, and broken my tig-tree ; It hath stripped it of its bark, and cast it away, Its branches are made white. •" The Held is laid waste, the land mourneth ; For the corn h destroyed, the new wine dried up ; The oil languisheth. Be ye ashamed, O ye husbandmen ; lament, 0 ye vinedressers, For the wheat and for the barley ; For perished is tlio harvest of the field." — (Joel i. 5, 6, 7, 10, 11.) A swann of locnets is here figuratively spoken of as a "nation " invfiding the country, spreading desolation and misery wherever it appears. The language of the passage is perfectly plain, and requires no comments, except, perhaps, the expres- sion. " Be ye ashamed," regarding which we may observe, that to be or become ashamed — which so frequently occurs in the Old Testament — according to the Hebrew idiom, denotes to be HISTORY OF HEBREW LITERATURE. 81 ^1 as a misery fectly xpres- that in the to he or become disappointed in one's expectAtions. As for example, Ps. xxii. 6. (Eng. vers, v, 5 :) " They cried unto Thee, and were delivered ; They trusted in Thee, and were not aahanoed. It is, our fathers trusted in Thee, and they were not disap- pointed in doing so. The rendering in the Authorized Version, " and they were not confounded," is not a correct rendenng of the original. So again, Ps. XXV. 2 : * " O my God, in Thee I trust ; let me not be aahanied ; Let not mine enemies triumph over me. It is, in Thee, 0 my God, I trust ; therefore, let me not be disappointed. Here the authorized version has given the literal rendering, " let me not be ashamed." If the reader will bear this idiom in mind, he will tind that many passages become perfectly clear, which otherwise are unintelligible. Take, for example, that beaiitiful description in Job vi. 18, 19, where the famishing caravans and wayfarers of Tenia and Sheba are represented to have turned from their regular route to some stream where they hoped to find water, but ai-e in verse twenty said, that " They were ashamed for having hoped, They came to it and blushed. What was there to be ashamed of ? Surely not for going in search of a place in the hope of finding water to (juench thi-ir parching thirst i' No, they were disappointed when they came to the place to find that tlie stream had been uried up by the continued extreme heat. ■' Blow ye the trumpet in Zion, and sound an alarm in my holy hill ; Let all the inhabitants of the land tremble, For the day of the Lord cometh ; yea it in near. A day of darkness and of gloominess, a day of clouds and dense darkness, As the dawn spreads upon the mountains : xo a great people and strong ; Like it there hath never been, neither shall there be any more after it, Even to the j'ears of many generations. A fire devoured before them, * and behind them a Hame burnetii , As the garden of Eden is the land before them. But behind them a desolate wilderness ; Yea, nothing can escape them. Their appearance, is like the appearance of horses ; And like horsemen, so they run. Like the noise of chariots, they leap upon the tops of the mountain^ ; Like the noise of a Hame of fire that consumeth the stubble, like a mighty nation arrayed for battle. Before them the people tremble ; All countenances lose tlieir brightness. They run like heroes, like men of war *' They clime the wall; " To accommodate it to the English, I have, as in our version, rendered the ^lit'jidar pfoiwiinx of the original freely by /ilitral j>ronoiiii.-<. im i Si ■»S !1 ^ If'!' : %' m ^' 82 HISTORY OF HEBREW LITERATURE. '8 ! And they inarch evety one in his ways, And change not their course. They press not one on the other : they move every one in his path ; They rush through sharp weapons and break not their ranki*. They stray about in the city ; they run upon the wall, They climb up on the houses, they enter the windows like a thief. Before them the earth quaketh, the heavens tremble. The sun and moon grow dark, And the stars withhold their brightness." — (Joel ii. 1-10.) This is one of the most striking and animated descriptioiiK that is to bo met with in the whole compass of prophecy : every part is depicted with the most terrible accuracy. In reading the prophecy we almost fancy that we hear the noise of the approaching hosts of voracious locusts, and gradually see the light of the sun grow dim from the swarms which, like a suc- cession of clouds, sweep through the air. Any one never having seen such a fearful sight, would naturally suppose that the prophet's picture is greatly overdrawn ; but there are hundreds who bear testimony to the accuracy of the description, and who do not speak merely from hearsay, but who themselves have been eyewitnesses of such dreadful events. We will subjoin here two more extracts from the narratives given by two well-known travellers, and which contain several important analogies with those contained in the above prophetic denounce- ment. Dr. Shaw says : " I never observed the mantes (a kind of locusts) to be gregarious ; but the locusts, properly so called, which are so frequently mentioned by sacred as well as by profane authors, are sometimes beyond expression. Those which I saw, anno. 1724 and 1725, were much bigger than our common grasshopper, and had brown spotted wings, with legs and bodies of a bright yellow. Their first appearance was towards the latter end of March, the wind having been some- time from the south. In the middle of April, their numbers were so vastly increased, that in tho heat of the day they formed themselves into large and numerous swarms, flew into the air like a si'.ccession of clouds, and, as the prophet Joel (ii. 10) expresses it, they darkened the sun. When the wind blew briskly, so that these swarms were crowded by others, or thrown one upon another, we had a lively idea of that comparison of the Psalmist (Ps. cix. 23) of being tossed up and down as the locusts. In the month of May, when the ovaries of these insects were ripe and turgid, each of these swarms began gradually to disaj^pear, and retired into the Metijiah, and other adjacent plains, where they deposited their eggs. These were no sooner hatched in June than each of the broods collected themselves into a compact body of a furlong or more in square, and marching afterwards directly forward towards the sea, they let nothing escape them ; eating up everything that was green and juicy, not only the lesser kinds HISTORY OF HEBREW LITER ATU UK. 88 •ance was of vo therein heath, stubble, and such like combustible mutter, whicii were severally set on fire upon the approach of the locusts. But thi.^ was all to no puipose, for the trenches were quickly tilled up, and the fires extinguished by infinite swarms succeed- ing one another, whilst the front was regnrdles?* of danger, and the real' pressed on so close that a retreat was altogether impos- siMe. A day or two after one of these broods were in motion, others were already hatched to march and glean after them, gnawing off the very bark, and the young branches of such trees as had before escaped with the loss oidy of their fruit and foliage. So justly hive they been compared by the prophet Joel (ii. 3) to a great army, who further observes that "the land is as the rjarden of Kden before them, and behind them a desolate wilderness." — (Shaw's Travels into Barbary and the Levant, p. 187, 4to Ed., London, 1757.) Devenot gives the following account : " Two days later (after the .south wind had begun to blow) we were informed that the plain was covered with birds, which proceeded like one solid body from east to west. Seen from a distance the field appeared to be in motion, or at least that a long current flowed through the plain. Believing that these were birds of migration, which thus passed by in veiy great numbers, we hastened towai'ds that direction to observe them, but instead of birds, we found a cloud of locusts which denuded the field, devouring every blade of grass, and not leaving the spot before it was perfectly stripped of every vegetation. A.s active, as lively ami eager as the Bedouins, they are, like them, children of the desert. After the wind had turned and l)econie contrary to their flight, they were driven back into the de.sert." Some of our modern ciitics maintain that the prophet Joel's declaration, " like it there hath never been, neither sliull there be any more after it," is contradictory with the stat«Mnont of Mosos, who likewise .said, " before them there wvtv no such locusts as they, neither after them shall be such. — (Kxod. x. 14.) This apparent discrepanc}' is by no meant a new discovery of modern critics, the eminent Jewish Rabbles, Jarchi, El»en Ezra, Kimchi.and others, have centuries ago noticed it, and explained that in the statement of Moses the qiuinfitij is refirred to, * ''Ii r 'if'] 3' ill mm i \i 84 HISTORY OF HEBREW LITERATUHB. whilHt the prophet Joel refcrw to the number of the difierent HpucicH OH unparalleled. And certainly there is nothing unrt'iMonable in this explanation, esp'cially when we see that the Psalmist mentions several species of locusts together m instruments in the hand of God. " And he ^nve to the b^QH {C'hanil) their iiicrenae, Aii.l tecame almost proverbial. This, in our opinion, is the proper mode of reconciling the two state- ments, indeed, there are similar stateuK^nts in 2 Kings .wiii. .5, and xxiii. 25, which cannot be reconciled in any other way. In the former passage it is said concerning King Hezekiah, He trusted in the Lord God of Israel ; so that after him was none like him among all the Kings of Judah, novdiiythut were before him." But in the latter passage it is likewise said of Kin<; Josiah "And like unto him was there no Kinf from God. " For his God," says the prophet, "instructed him to discretion, and teached him ;" that is, the husbandman. The son of Sirach, in the apocryphal book Ecclesiasticus, says : "Hate not laborious work, neither hushandry, which the Most High hath ordained." — (Ecclesiasticus vii. lo.) Even some of the heathen writers have spoken of agricidture, as the most useful and most necessaiy of all .sciences, and ascribe the inven- tion or the suggestion of it to their deities. The noble occupation of tilling the ground, which our first parent under JJivine direction assumed, was also adopted hy his eldest .son Cain, whilst the younger brother Abel ailopted the next important occupation, by becoming a keeper of flocks. Gradually, as the human family increased, circunistaiiees necessitated the as.sumption of other employments, still, hns- l)andry, and the keeping of cattle ahvaj'S, even unto this day remain the ruling occupations throughout the world. After the flood, when Noah and those that were with him 31 t- t di 86 HISTORY OF HBBUBW LITKRATURE. uaine out of tho ark, tho first two acts which Mohus reconld of the patriarch ih, that hu huilt an altar and oH'ured htniit oHW- in^s to th(3 Lord, and that ))o ln^^an to he a htishnrxhiian, iiiieing permitted to enter tho Holy Place, and have direct intercourse with Jehovah. Such a high degree of sanctity altogether precludes the idea of Noah having sinned knowingly; and the statement that "he began to be a husbandman,'— having previous to the flood probably followed the occupation of keeping of flock.s — strengthens still more tho suppositioii that he was not aware of the intoxicating power inherent in the juice of the grape. But, although the act was not com- mitted wilfully, the record of it still stands as an imperishable memorial that the first act'of drunkenness evef recorded was the cause of a fearful curse, antl the heart-rending miseries daily brought to our notice which are caused by intoxication, only too clearly and fearfully demonstrate that the curse follows still, with unerring steps, tho drunkard's path. The cultivation of the vine, however, formed over afterwards a very important part of husbandry, so much so, indeed, that in the bestowing of blessings it is mentioned in connection with the grain produce. Thus, for example. Genesis xxvii. 2(S, the patriarch Isaac blessing his son Jacob, says : " Therefore Gotl aive tiiee of the dew of heaven, and the fatness of the earth, and j)lenty of coin and wine." Again, Moses bles.sing the children of Israel, .says : " Israel then shall dwell in safety HISTORY OF HEHREW LITEKATURB. H7 alone, the fountain of Jacob shall he upon a land of corn and wintN also his lioavens shall drop down dow." (Deut. xxxiii. 28.) In the prophetic doclarations of the patriarch Jacob, na to what should l)etall his sons in future days, and tho territories whicn they should respectively inherit, in speaking of tho fer- tility of the portion which tho tribe of Judah should obtain for a possession, ho says : " Binding to the vine his fiml, ' , And hia oss'i onlt to tho choice vine ; r He washes in wine his garments, And in the ))1o

e stem be injured ; and that the wine will be in such abundance that it will be no more valued than water u.sed in washing gar- ments. Such poetic hyperboles are common in the Old Testa- ment, for example, 1 Kings x. 27, it is said that Solomon " uiad<} silver to be in Jeru.salem as stones," to expre-ss that it was in great abundance. The piophet Joel makes the moun- tains drop down new wine, and tho hills H<^w with milk. (Joel iii. 18.) Much labour and care was evidently bestowed upon- the vineyards amongst the ancient Jews ; this is apparent f roiuf the frequent allusion that is made to them in the Scriptures. We will subjoin here the sublime paral)h' of the vineyard, recorded in Lsaiah v. 1-7, as an iliusti-ation of the great care bestowed on the vineyards : " 1. Let me sin^ now, to my Insloved ; A song oi my beloved concerning his vineyard, A vin jyard hatl my helovod, On a high and fruitful hill. 2. And he fenced it, and cleared it from stoncM, And he planted it with the vine of Sorek, ' ! And he built a tower in the midst of it ; And also hewed a vine-vat in it ; And he expected, that it shoulil produce grapoM, And it brought forth poiaonous berrieb. 3. And now, O inhabitants of Jerusalem, anwu. (>. And I will make it a desolation, It shall not be pruned, neither shall it be digged, And briers and thorns shall come up ; And I will command the clouds. That they shed no rain uiran it. ^il i i I i> J! ■i ' - -a 1% \:4i '"■' yp s ' 11 :*8 HISTORY OF HEBREW LITERATURE. 7< Trnly, the vineyard of the Lord of Hosts is the honse of Israel ; And the nuen of Judah the plant of his delight, And he looked for judgment, but behold tyranny : And for righteousnesa, bnt behold a cry. The literal rendering of the last part of verse one is : " On a horn, the son of oil." The expre.ssion is highly poetical. The sacred writer speaks of a peak or summit of a mountain under the figure of a horn which rises above the body of animals, which, no doubt, sug- gested the simile. This figure is also commonly used among the Arabians, and was afterwards adopted as an ordinary expres- sion by other nations ; hence we tind it used with the names of some of the summits of the Alps, as the Schreckhorn, Buck- horn, (fee. The expression, " son of oil," is quite an oriental expression, denoting an exceedingly fertile place, a place that owes its fertility entirely to the richness of the soil, hence saiil to be the son of fatness or oil. " He fenced it." The Hebrews used two kinds of fences, viz., living hedges and stone walls, and these according to modern travellers are still in use round the vineyards in Judea and Syiia. " And cleared it from stunt's." To Iree a piece of land of stones before it wasplanteil. was a mark of good and careful husbandry. " And he planteil it with the vine of Sorek." Sorek is the name of a valley lying between Ascalon and Gaza, antl famous for its choice grapes, which, according to the Jewish wiitc'"*, have such small kernels that they are scarcely perceptible. Some traveller suppose that Eshcol — where the spies gathered a single cluster of grapes which was so large and heavy, that thej'^ had to bear it between two u|)on a staff — and Sorek are only different names for the same valley. Thi.s supposition seems to be favoured by what is stated (Num. xiii. 28, that the place was called Eshcol. i. e., a cluster of grapes, in commemoration of the cluster of grapes which the spies had cut there, so that probably before that event its name was Sorek. " And he built a tower in the midst of it." C\:>nnnentators have generally explained that the tower was (.lesigned as a watch-tower for the keeper of the vineyard from which he could overlook ohe whole place. But, according to Isa. i. t and September the months of the wine-harvest, the Delta is entirely overflowed, for the vintaj^e in Egypt takes place in the latter part of July, and is tinished in the early part of August, while the inundation, as a general thing, does not commence until the end of August, and certainly never before the middle of the month. (Compare Hartmann, ^gypten, pp. 118, 187.) From the foregoing remarks it will be seen that the objec- tions urged in regard to the Mosaic account of the butler's dream, can be most satisfactorily met, and proved to be per- fectly gi'oundless. There are several terms for wine employed in the Old Testa- ment about which some writers apparently hokl rather strange notions, we will, therefore, embrace this opportunity of ottering a few brief explanatory remarks on these terms. The term which occurs by far most fre([uently is y>t [yayin), and is commonly derived from the obsolete root "i^ (yavan), I. e., to ferment, synonymous to the Arabic verb yavun. Whether this derivation be correct or not, there can be no doubt as to its intoxicating quality, of this the case of Noah, above alluded to, I'urnishes sufficient proof, if there were no other passages alluding to it. The intoxicating power of the yayin, i. e., wine, is, however, frequently referred to in Scripture. " Sp.arkliiig are h'm eyes (mhiaijhi) from wine. And white are bis teeth from milk." (Gen. xlix. 12.) The reader must be careful not to look I'pon this passage as speaking approvingly of indulging in the drinking of wine, we shall presently show, thjit tlie Scriptuios, on the contrary, denounce in the severest terms such a pernicious practice. The figures are merely employed, like those of the ])receding verse, to depict the immense fertility of the inheritance of the tribe of Judah. Hence, also, the precautionary conmiand to Aaron, "Do not drink (?/a?/in) wine nor strong drink, thou, nor thy soas with thee, when ye go into the tabernacle of the con- gregation, le.st ye die." (Lev. x. 0.) They were entirely forbidden to drink it when they were to perform their sacred duties, for even the tasting might lead to intem- perance. And Philo, in speaking of tlie wisdom of this command, enumerates four results wliich the drinking of wine produces — "hesitation, forgetfuhn'ss, sleep, and folly." Against the non-observance of this command, the prophet Isaiai; afterwards bitterly cries out, " the priest and the prophet have erred through strong drink, and are disordered by wine." (Isa. xxviii. 7). \' alEIi ,| 1 P. .;:i 94 HISTORY OF HKHHKW LITEHATURK. 'S ■ i I A similar prohibitiun existed also among some of the heathen nations. Tho Egyptian priests, and those that were about to be initiated into the mysteries of Isis, wore not allowed to take wine. Among the Persian Mngi and the Pythagorians a sim- ilar law i)revailed. Among several Greek trilx.s there existed a custom, that if any one intended to perform some .sacred act, or wished to consult an oracle, ho was to abstain from food on that day, but from wine for three days previously. "Wine," says Solomon, " is a mocker, strong drink is l)oisterous, and whosoever is deceived thereby is not wise." (Prov. xx. 1). Although the drinking of wine is not forbidden, not even to the priests ordinarily, the indulging in it is most strongly denounced. '* Woe unto them," exclaims isaiah, "who rise up early in the murning, thai they may follow strong drink ; r, And continue till after twilight tilt wine inflame them." (Isa. v. 11). Another term of frequent occurrence is, 'QJlipj (Tirosh,) derived from the verb 'Q3"|i ( yarasli,) to neise, to possess, and is, according to Gesenius and others, so called, because it seizes tlie head. The correctness of this derivation, we must say, admits of some doubt, and we certainly would rather favour the sup- pasition of its being so called, because the 'product or products denoted Ijy it con.stitutetl, to a more or less extent, the posses- sion of the husbandman fiom the remotest times. We have several cogent reasons lor adt)j)ting this vieW. In the first place, the term tirosli is frecjuently used in connection with yy^ {dogan) i. e., corn, especially in the bestowing of blessings, and we assume, therefore, that wherever these two terms are employed together, the term dayan is used to represent all kinds of grain produce, whilst tirosh represents all kinds of liquid produce. Such an application of the terms adds great force to all the passages in which they occur. Take, for exam- ple, the blessing of Isaac : " Therefore God give thee of the dew of heaven, the fatness of earth, and plenty of {dagan and tirosh), corn and wine." (Gen. xxvii. 28.) That is, plenty of all kinds of grain and liquid pro' ii a e. .;.i , . ii?ri ill •ff :iili ^. •' 5 ! I i 9 98 HISTORY OF HEBRKW LITERATURE. In ordtT to sets fully tho force and beauty of the image contained in this passage, it is necessary for tho reader to recall to mind what we have above stated, that in the east the sheplierds are obliged to wander from place to place, often a great distance apart from on(3 another, in search of pasturage. This naturally involves a great deal of travelling, which not unfrefjuently proves too much for the young and sickly in the Hocks. It is in such cases where the patience and tender care of eastern shejjherds is so strikingly' manifested. Modern travellers, hardly without an exception, speak in admiration of the pleasing sight of seeing th(i shcpheids take up such lambs that show signs of fatigue, and carry them in their bosoms, and petting them. What a striking contrast do those untutored children of the desert furnish us to what we frequently see in the streets of our civilized cities, where cruelty and torture often take the place of pity and kindness. Their tender care is especirll^^ bestowed upon " the nursing ewes," wliich they are very I'areftd to lead gently, so that they may not fatigue themselves. lo appears that the greatest care is required in regard to the dams and their young, that they should not be overdriven. Hence Jacob, in apoligizing to his brother Esau, for not accompanying him in his journey, says: " My lord kno\veth that the children are tender, and the flocks and the herds with young are witli me ; and if they are over- driven one day, all the flocks will die." — (Gen. xxxiii. 13.) How beautifully and forcibly does this simile from the pastoral life depict the guardian care of the good Pastor of the universe, who " neither slumbers nor sleeps," but is always ready with His helping hand to assist in time of trouble or afliiction, and speak the comforting words : " Fear not for I am with thee : Be not (lismayiul ; for I am thy God : • , I strengthen thee ; yea, I help thee ; Yea, 1 uphold thcu with my righteous right hand." Is. xli. 10. We may hero also remark, that precaution was taken against the smaller cattle being injured by the larger ones, by dividing the folds into two compartments, one for the small and the other for the large cattle, and the shepherds lying down between the two folds ; gradually the expression " to lie down between two folds" became proverbial as indicating the enjoy- ment of a happy and peaceful life. This will illustrate what is said of Issachar. — (Gen. xlix. 14. " Issachar w a strong ass, ...A Crouching between two folds." The tribe of Issachar was the most valiant of all the tribes, and could always be depended upon in time of need, when i Sli HISTORY OF IIEBRKW LITERATUUR 99 image 0 recall lat the often a iturage. ich not ,' in the lev care Modern ation of h lambs )m9,and itutored ntly see [ torture nursing hat they best care ;hat they ng to his ley, says: ;he flocks are over- 3.) How toral life [universe, ily with tion, and xli. 10. against dividing and the (T down llie down ^e enjoy- what is le tribes, kd, when some of the otlier tribes displayed great want of patriotism. Their valour and patriotism were rewarded by their obtaining the most fertile and clmrniing territory of the Holy Land for an inheritance, includiii<| the celebrated plains of Megiddo, Jezreel, and Esdraelon. The ea.stern and southern portioti was mountainous, and, therefore, in every respect well adapted for the raising of cattle ; no wonder, then, that the tribe should have given itself up to a pastoral life, and hence the expression : "Crouching between two folds*." and not as in the English version, " couching down between two burdens." By great industr}' in its domestic afiaii's, and the judicious management of its political policy, the tribe soon accumulated great wealth, so that he is aptly compared to " a bony" or " robust ass." Husbandry, from its very first institution in the garden of Eden, when God placed our first parents there " to till it, and to guard it," likewise became a favourite occupation among the ancient Hebrews. Cain, the eldest son of the fiist human pair, like his father, became " a tiller of the ground." Noah, no sooner had he left the ark than he " began to he a husband- man." The patriarchs, though chiefly leading a nomadic life, yet, Avhen a favourable opportunity offered itself, sometimes settled down for a time, and applied themselves to agriculture, for thus we read that Isaac, whilst sojourning in Gerar, " sowed in that land, and received in the same j'ear a hundredfold " — (Gen. xxvi. 12.) And this practice of the patriarchs furnishes us with a conclusive an.swer to the objection which some modern critics have urged against Joseph's dream of "binding sheaves" in the field, recorded in Genesis xxxviii. 7, as being altogether inappropriate, since the sons of Jacob were not husbandmen, but were roaming from place to place tending their flocks. But although this, no doubt, was their chief occupation, yet we may take it for granted that they, in accordance with the ordinary practice of eastern nomads, when they came to a place that supplied pasture for any length of time applied themselves also to cultivating the soil. If we now take this prevailing practice into consideration, the propriety of the di'eam becomes at once 'apparent. When the Israelites had taken possession of the promised land, its great fertility, which made it proverbially to be designated " a land flowing with milk and honey," could not * The term Q'^jTlS'©^ {mishpethayim) two folds, is derived from ^iS^ {*haphath) to put, to jilace, and has the dual form in accordance witli tliu rule, that the dual form is used with things which consist of two either by nature or by art. m '1 m 1 1^ " :? ; 100 UISTOUY OF IIEHIiKW LITERATURE. fail to constituto husbandry nn tho cl)ief occupation of the iiihabitantH, for bcmdes being biciativo, it posscHHcd the additional chann of tending to d'tiaestic happiness. No woiuler, then, that the poetical writings of tlio Scriptures .slioidd abound with the most sublime figures drawn from the manifold occupations of agriculture. Hut here, in order fully to appreciate the force and beauty of many images the reader must take into consideration that tho climate of the Holy Land, in some resj)octs, greatly diifers from ours, and especially is this the case as regards the falling of rain, so important to the successful culture of the ground. In Palestine, ruin gcfnerally begins to fall in October. This rain, which in Scripture is called "the first or early rain," continues frequently for an entire week without intermission, when it ceases again, and then there is an interval of some days, and not unfrcipiently even of some weeks, when it commences again. This " early rain" is not heavy, and during the intermissions, as soon as the soil is rendered sufficiently soft for ploughing, the husliandmen carry on tho various field labours. In December the rain becomes gradually more continuous and copious, and during the months of January and February sometimes altcaiiates with snow, which, however, generally disaj)pears the same day. Yet, occasionally theie aie very heavy snow falls in February, and the snow has been known to lie for several weeks. In Aluccabees xiii. 22, such a heavy snow fall is alluded to which prevented the march of an army : " Wherefore, Tryphon made readj all his horsemen to come that night, but there fell a very great snow, by reason of which he came not." During tho winter months storms, accompanied by loud thunder and vivid lightning, are of frequent occurrence, and Rabbi Joseph Schwarz says : " As we have no lightning conductors in all Palestine, the lightning often strikes and causes some damage."* {Descriptive and Historical Sketch of Palestine, p. 327.) * I may here mention that although the honour of the discovery of attracting the electricity of the clouda to the earth is accorded to Franklin who published a memoir on that subject in 1749, and to Dalibiird, who in May, 1752, erected in his ganlen a rod of iron about forty feet hiyh, terminating in a point in its upper end by which experimentjhe fully established the practicability of attract- ing the electricity of the clouds to the earth. Yet, it appears from several passages in the Talmud tbat an apparatus for conducting away lightning was already known to the authors of that great work. In Tosephta Sabbath, ch. vii., oc )ur3 the following passage : " To place iron between the young chickens is (for- bidden) this (being) the superstitious custonj of the Amonites, (a term frequently used in tlie Talmud for heathens in general), but to put iron some- where on account of the thunder and the lightning is permitted." HISTORY or HEBRKW LITERATURE. MKDICINE. 101 From numerouH j)a8.sajjes in the Old TeMtainont it is evident tluit the practice of med'u'ine amongst the aneient llebroWM is of very liigh anticjuity, although it is inipossible to gather from tliosc! passages to wliat extent the science was known to theuj. No doubt, at first the numt simple remedies were emj)loytd, and so gradually developed itself into a science. The medical men of l^gypt were renowned from ancient times, and the various hrnnclies appertaining to the hcaUiif/ art aj)parently found many adnnrers in that country. Herodotus infonns us that, "the medical practice is dividt^d among them as follows: each physician is for one kind of sickness, and all places are crowded with physicians, for there are physicians for the head, physi- cians for the teeth, physicians for the stomach, and for internal disease." (ii. 84 ) Now, considering that each malady had its proper physician who made the cure of that malady a speciality, we can easily imagine that instead of a family having one liouse physician, as is generally the case now, in those times they would require quitt; a number, and this will explain how it happened that Jo.seph had .so many ])hy.sicians among his household whom he designated his .servants. " And Joseph commanded his .servants the phy.sicians to embalm his father: and the physicians embalmed Israel." (Gen. L. 2.) Here we have another instance of a heathen bearing testimony to the truth of the Mo.saic account which modern critici.sm strives to impugn. As the present mode of embalming occupies only a short time, objection has also V)oen niade to the time stated to have occupied in the embalming of the patriarch Jacob, namely : " forty days," and that " so many days are completed in embalm- ing."— (Gen. 1. 8.) But here we may again appeal to a heathen author to show that the time given in the sacred narrative is neither inaccurate nor arbitraiy. Diodorus Siculus, who flf^urished in the times of Julius Cffisar and Augu.stus, and who prided himself on having travelled through the greatest part of the provinces of Europe and Asia, as well as through Egypt, in order that he might not commit the usual faults of those who ventured to treat of places which they had not visited*, remarks in reference to embalming. " They prepare the body first with cedar oil and various other substances, more than thirty (another reading has forty) days ; then after they have added myrrh, cinnamon, and other drugs which have not only the power of preserving the body a long time, but imparting also a pleasant odour to it, they commit it to the relatives of the decea.sed." — (i. 11.) There were evidently different modes of embalming in vogue r > I . '■ ■- • !'' |; r'' ■ i ■\ ' iJ- I laSs II I 102 HISTORY OF HEBREW LITERATURE. among the Egyptians at different periods of time, and probably also in different districts. The account given by Herodotus differs materially from the description given by Diodorus. According to the former, the time occupied in the embalming extended always over " seventy days." There was also a great difference in the costliness of the different modes. The most costly is estimated at about a talent of silver, or about $1,000. A less costly mode is said to have cost about $400, and there was yet a still more inexpensive mode employed by the poorer classes. In later times the Babylonians, and in some instances the Hebrews also, embalmed the bodies in honey, after having covered them with wax. (Strabo, xvi. 746 ; Josephus Ant, xiv. 10 par. 4.) The Persians enveloped the body with wax only ; and the Greeks and Romans sometimes with honey only, whilst the Ethiopians plastered the body with gypsum, and, in order to make it resemble the living person, they painted it. There are frequent allusions throughout the Old Testament to physicians. In Exod. xxi. 19, there is a law laid down in reference to anyone receiving an injury at the hands of another, that he who smote him " shall pay for the loss of his time, and shall cause him to be thoroughly healed." This implies the existence of regular physicians, and, indeed, Josephus, in speaking of this law, says : " as much as he paid to the physicians." There are but few indications in Scripture as to the reme "'es that were employed in those times. According to 2 Ki. gs XX. 7, figs were used as a plaster : " And Isaiah said, take a lump of figs. And they took and laid it on the boil, and he recovered." "The balm or balsam was particularly celebrated as a medicine. " Is there no balm in Gilead ; is there no physician there ? Why then is not the health of the daughter of my people recovered ?" — (Jer. viii. 22.) This passage clearly shows the high curative qualities which were ascribed to the balsam. As much Ks to say, do my people not possess the best remedy, and a physician to use it skilfully, and yet there is no improve- ment ? there is, therefore, no longer any hope of their being healed. The language, of course, is highly figurative, inas- much as the prophet refers to the moral disease of the Jewish people. The Hebrew name for this once famous and costly medicine is i-|2 (tsori), and is probably derived from the Arabic verb (tseH) tojlovj, to distil, as it is a gum which exudes from a plant It is said, that it was first accidentally discovered by shepherds whilst tending their flocks by the goats browsing on the plants. The plants seem to have been very plentiful in HISTORY OF HEBKEW LITERATURE. 103 Gilead, hence frequently spoken of as the bahn of Gilead, as if that mountainous di.> trict was its special home. Some ancient historians speak of Judea as the country which alone has been favoured with the plant from which the balsam i» obtained. Josephus says : " This country bears that balsam which is the most preciouS drug that is there, and grows there alone." — (Ant. xiv. c. iv. 1.) Compare also Piinj/ xii. 54 ; Tacit, Hiatorice v. 6. Diodorus, however, speaks of the balsam plant as also growing in Arabia from whence it was trans- planted into Egypt. Vespasian and Titus brought some specimens which they had taken from gardens near Jericho to Rome,- and exhibited them as an interestmg curiosity. Accord- ing to Pliny, who gives an account of the plant in his celebrated Hiatoria Natavalia, it bears a much greater resemblance to the vine than to the myrtle ; it is planted, and treated like the former, and its seeds, resemble, in flavour, that of wine ; it grows with grtiat rapidity, and bears f luit at the end of three yeai-s ; it is an evergreen, and has not many leaves ; it attains the height of about six feet ; the blossoms are white, similar to those of the acacia, odoriferous, and arranged in clustei-s of three. According to Josephus, " the sprouts are cut with sharp stones, and at the incisions they fther the juice which droj)s down like tears." — (Joseph. Wars c. vi. s. 6.) The use of au inm instrunxent, except in pruning, is said to be fatal to the plant. The best sort of balsam is that which is obtained before the formation of the seed. The bark was also used for various medicinal purjwses, and even cuttings of the wood were boiled for unguents, and formed quite a lucrative article of commerce at one time. The balsam of Gilead formed an article of commerce from the very earliest times. Already, in Gen. xxxvii. 25, we find it mentioned as one of the articles which the Ishmuelites com- ing from that district were taking down into Egypt. In Ezek. xxvii. 17, it is ajjain mentioned as one of the articles which Israel and Judah brought to the markets of Tyre. It seems to have been as much sought after as a perfume as for a pharmaceutic drug for external diseases. The treatment of sores and external wounds was, according to Isaiah i. 6, exceedingly simple, it consisting only of |)rossing the wound to free it from any impurity by making it bleed — a practice by no means uncommon in our days — then mollif3/ing it with oil and binding it up. Throughout the East, oil seems to be commonly used in healing wounds. The eastern traveller, Tavemier, says : " In India they have a certain pre- paration of oil and melted grease, which they commonly use for the healing of wounds." — (Voyage India.) It is here also worthy of notice that from Genesis xxxvi. 24» i III; 104 HISTORY OF HEBREW LITERATURE. it would appear that mineral waters were deemed deserving of being specially mentioned. The passage reads : " And these are the children of Zibeon ; both Ajah and Anah ; this was that Anah, who found the hot springs in the desert, when he fed the asses of Zibeon his father." In the English version it is rendered, " who found the mules in the wilderness." But the Hebrew word Q^^^ (yeTnim) is derived from an ancient root tni {yv/m) to be warm ; and critics are now agreed that the word denotes Iwt springs, and is, therefore, correctly rendered in the vulgate cmquce calidce. The " hot springs," mentioned in the above passage, are most probably the hot sulphurous springs of Callirrhoe, about one nour and a half east of the Dead Sea. These springs became in after time celebrated for their salubrity, and buildings were erected there for the reception of invalids, of which, however, nothing remains but some scattered fragments of pottery and tiles. Josephus, in speaking of Herod's distemper, observes, *' that he bathed himself in warm baths that were at Callirrhoe, which, besides their oth(T general virtues, were also fit to drink ; * which water runs into thalake called Asphaltitis." — {^nt xvii. ch. vi. s. 5.) Theie were also some ancient Roman copper medals found there. In later times the Hebrew physicians advanced in science, and greatly increased in number. Jesus, the son of Sirach, speaks of the physicians as worthy of honour, and his remarks imply that such was due to them on account of their skill. As 0 many of the readers may not possess the apocryphal books we CCVwO^VCOy . will subjoin the passage : ^ ' "1. Honour a. physician with the honour due unto him, for the uses which you may have of liim : for the Lord hath created him. 2. From the moat High Cometh healing, and he shall receive honour (or* gift) of the King. 3. The skill of the physician shall lift up his head ; and in the sight of great | men he shall be in admiration. 4. The Lord hath created medicine out of the earth ; and he that ia wise wil not abhor them. ■1 5. Was not the water made sweet with wood, that the virtue thereof might | be known. 6. And he hath given men skill, that he might be hono"rp<'. in his *narvellom| works. 7. With such doth he heal (men) and taketh away their pain. 8. Of such doth the apothecary make a confection ; and of his works there ii| no end, and from him is peace over all the earth." Ecclesiasticus xxx viii. 1 'n- tion, and as time rolled on, the love of this study .'pt constantly increasing, so that during the middle ages- _ we shall hereafter more fully show — the most eminent phys.cians were furnished by the Jews, and were fequently found in the high position of household physicians ai Uia different courts of Europe and Asia, highly honoured and esteemed. And when we come down to more modern times, we have ample "ools that this fondness ior the science of medicine has by no :^eans diminished, but if anything increaser Throughout Europe some of the most skilful doctors arc •/.K)re\vs. But of this more hereafter. HEBREW POETB ■,i fr- it is worthy of notice that from the eariiest time we already find poetry and music going hand in hand. Lamech was the first i)oet, his son, Jubal, was the first musician. The peculiar characteristics of Hebrew poetry, which distin- guish that class of composition from mere prose, are not nearly of such a marked nature as the prosodies of the western nations, and hence, any one not familiar with what actuallj"^ cons^titutes Hebrew poetry could not possibly distinguish the poetical from the prose compositions. Wo may safely say, there are few of the English Bible readers who would discover any poetry in the following passages : " Adah and Zillah, hear my voice ; ye wives of Lamech, hearken unto my speech : for I have slain a man to my woii ding, and a young man to my hurt." (Gen. iv. 23.) " Reuben, thou art my first born, my might, and the beginning of my strength, the excellence of dignity, and the excellence of power." (Gen. xlix. 3.) And yet, these passig' -e possess all the essential characteristics of Hebrew poetry. As we often shall have to quote from the poetical portions, we will here, for tb onvenience of the reader, subjoin a list of them, so th:it h^ ^fin at any time refer to it. Poetical Books and Portions of the Old Testament. 1. The Book of Job, beginning at ch. iii., and ending ch. i xlii., at V. 7. 2. The Book of Psalms. 3. The Proverbs. 4. Ecclesiastei.'. 5. The Song of Solomon. ■ "- 6. 7. It ah. Jeiemiah. 14 T f, M m ill I ;(!< ;i^ ■ I, I ■II ;, If 106 HISTORY OF HEBUEW LITKUATL'RK. 8. The Lamentations of Jeremiah. 9. Ezekiel. 10. The minor Prophets. Besides these books, the following poetical compositions occur among the prose writings : The address of Lamech to his two wives. (Gen. iv. 23, 24. Noah's malediction against Canaan and blessing of Shem and Japheth. — (Gen. ix. 25, 26, 27.) The prophetic address of Jacob to his sons. — (Gen. xlix., 3 to 27, inclusive.) The Song of Moses. — (Exodus xv. 1 to 19, inclusive.) The Song of the well. — (Num. xxi., 17, 18.) The prophecies of Baalam. — (Num. xxiii., 7 to 10, inclusive ; 18 to 24, inclusive ; and xxiv., 3 to 9, inclusive, and 15 to 24 inclusive.) The last address of Moses to the people of Israel. — (Deut. xxxii., 1 to 43 inclusive.) The triumphal song of Deborah. — (Judges v.) The parable of Jotham. — (Judges ix. 8-15 inclusive.) The riddle of Samson, and its solution by the Philistines. — (Judges xiv. 14, 18.) The exulting chant of Hannah. — (1 Sam. 1 to 10 inclusive.) The sublime eleffv of David on the death of his friend Jonathan.— (ii. Sam. i. 19 to 27, inclusive.) Many circumstances contributed to make the Hebrews a highly poetic people. The nomadic and peaceful lives of tlie patriarchs ; the bondage of the Israelites in Egypt, and their wonderful deliverance and exodus from that land ; their pro- tracted wandering in the wilderness ; their finally taking pos- session of a land that was said to flow with milk and honey ; their natural taste for music, which was afterwarda carefully fostered in the Temple service ; the beautiful and romantic scenery of the Holy Land, their magnificent Temple and its imposing service : these, and many other circumstances in the wonderful and chequered history of the Israelites, furnished inexhaustible sources from which the most sublime images could be drawn, and which the Hebiew poets were never weaiy of turning to account. Hence, " the Bible," as a writer has justly observed, " is a mass of beautiful figures ; its words and its thoughts are alike poetical ; it has gathered around it cen- tral truths, all natural beauty and interest ; it is a temple with one altar and one God, but illuminated by a thousand varied lights, and studded with a thousand ornaments," The inherent love of the ancient Hebrews for poetry is strikingly apparent, even from the limited amount of literature that has escaped the ravages of time. Their language, as soon as it passed the limits of mere narrative, at once became digni- fied: their blessings; their prayers and supplications; their exhortations and denunciations ; their charges and admoni- tions ; their dire lamentations and triumphant bursts of joy ; HISTORY OF HEBREW LITERATURE. 107 all display strikingly their natural taste for poetry ; and this will account for so much of the Hebrew Scriptures being written in poetry, and that even in the prose writings we so frequently meet with poetic eftusions. It is a very great pity that so many of the most beautiful poetic images of the original are either entirely or partially lost in translations, but this is no fault of the translators, since in many cases it would be impossible to retain the figures, and at the same time render them intelligible into a foreign language. The imagery of the ancient Hebrews, like tender exotics of southern lands, soon lose their beauty when trans- planted into a soil and clime less congenial than those of their native land. In a Commentary, however, where an opportunity exists of accompanying the translation with explanatorj'' remarks, there is no reason why a literal rendeiing should not be given, and this, the reader will have observed, has been my constant practice in the preceding pages, and will be faithfully continued throughout this work, in order that those of my readers not acquainted with Hebrew may have an opportunity of forming some idea of the great beauty of Oriental figurative diction. Of the poetical books of the Old Testament, the first that claims our notice is the book of Job, as being, no doubt, the TQod ancient writincf that has come clown to us. In this book we possess a monument of genius, which, simply regarded as a literary production, stands unrivalled for bold and sublime thoughts, for forcible and accurate delineations of objects, and for faithful depicting of variety of character, by any poem, either in ancient or modern literature. It is a mirror in which the various characters of individuals are faithfully reflected ; hence sceptics, as well as orthodox writers of first rank, genius, taste, and learning, have been profuse in their laudation of the literary merit of the book. Gilfillan, in speaking of the magni- ficence of the book of Job, has very aptly observed : " If any word can express the merit of the natural descriptions in Job, it is the word gusto. You do something mo.a than see his behemoth, his war-horse, and his leviathan ; you touch, smell, hear, and handle them too. It is no shadow of the object he sets before you, but the object itself, in its length, breadth, height, and thickness. In this point he is the landseei^of ancient poetry, and something more. — {The Bards of the Bible, p. 77.) Pope regards the whole book of Job, with regard both to sublimity of thought, exceeding, beyond all comparison, the most noble parts of Homer. ^ - The poesy of the book of Job is the pure poesy of nature, the ^yvAry^*A I animal, vegetable, and mineral kingdoms, the heavens, the seas, and their contents all are maile to contribute -mi ) 1 ! Mi V ) I i- ^i ii '.1 J I 1. /^(TvWk-^tvL o^^^oL^^/s^iyLcr tu,' o4^,. richly to Cf^r^ jp^^vv^^ov^ (^ 108 HISTORY OF HEBREW LITERATURE. embellish the conceptions of the author. Job had evidently made the material universe his study, but as he rambled through its vast domain in search of knowledge, wherewith to store his inquiring mind, he beheld likewise everywhere the handiwork of the Most High ; and thus as he drank deeper and deeper of its intellectual draughts, he became, at the same time, more and more fully impressed with the all-pervading power, greatness, and love of its Lord and Creator. The study of nature had made him better acquainted with the merciful dealings, of the God of nature, and hence his firm belief in the everlasting power of *he Almighty. In everthing he perceives the hand of God, and tliough it be far beyond his comprehen- .sion, he still maintains thirt it is so ordered for some wise pur- pose. This doctrine he establishes by such cogent arguments as the following : " Why do the wicked live ; J They gi'ow old, yea they increase in wealth. Their seed is established in their sight about them, And their offspring before their eyes. Their houses are secure from fear, And the rod of God is not upon them." (ch, xxi. 7, 8, 9.) As much % to say, here, then, is prosperity, where we should have expected poverty ; here is what may tend to make life happy, where we should have looked for misery. This indeed may appear strange to us, yet so it is ; such are the inscrutable ways of God, such his inscrutable dealings with man ! Truly they arc past finding oat ! It is upon this overruling providence that Job takes his stand against his friends, who look upon his calamities and sufferings as the consequence of some sin which he had com- mitted. Job, on the contrary, maintains that, as the wicked are often allowed to prosper, so on the other hand the most upright may sometimes be subjected to misfortune. God acts according to His sovereign ])leasure. His omnipotence is indeed ai)parent in every part of the creation, but his justice in the government of the w^orld cannot always be comprehended ; of this we have examples in the prosperity of the wicked, and the sufferings and afflictions to which the righteous are often subjected. It must not, however, be inferred from Job's contending against his friends, that the calamities which had befallen him were no evidence of his guilt, that he ente"tained the idea that man may be altogether free from sin. No, he entirely repudiates such a notion in his answer to Bildad's arguments in ch. ix. 2 : " Truly, I know it is so, And how shall man be just with God ? " HISTORY OF HEBREW LITERATURE. loo It is us you have stated regarding the sinfulness of man, that admits of no doubt, for no man can be just in the sight of God. Upon this fundamental truth he often dwells ; thus in verse 20, he says : " If I am right, my mouth condemns mo ; Am I perfect, and it will declare me guilty." As much as to say : " Although I may appear just in my own eyes, and do not feel conscious of any guilt, still my own mouth must acknowledge that I am a sinner. But whilst I fully admit that no man is free from sin, yet this by no means argues that the calamities which have now befallen me are chastisements for sin. '• One thing it is, therefore I say it, ' - ' Perfect or wicked — He destroyeth. "— (v. 22. ) That is, one thing is certain, and therefore I say it freely upright or wicked, all are liable to affliction, and consequently, my sufferings are no proof of sin. Job had, no doubt, instituted a rigid self-examination ; and although he may have seen many shortcomings in his pa.st actions, yet he could not discover any sin of such a nature as to lead to such chastisements. His children, too, had evidently been brought up in the fear of God ; this is evident from the anxiety which he evinced in his rising up early in the morning, to offer burnt offerings as an atonement for the sins which his sons might have committed in an unguarded moment during their festivities. The sudden bereavement of all possessions and children, together with the infliction of such bodily suffer- ing, must necessarily have been a perfect riddle to Job ; and feeling conscious that these calamities were not the consequence of sin which either he or his sons had committed, he looked upon them with an eye of faith, as instances of those dealings of God with man, which no human wisdom is able to fathom. But although Job's calamities were to him involved in such perfect mystery, that mystery Is entirely solved in the two first chapters of the book, in which we have a full account of all that transpired with regard to Job's trial. The occurrences upon earth, and the transactions in heaven are alike brought before us in the most vivid and distinct manner, intended to brines to our view subjects worthy of the deepest meditation, and to con- vey lessons of momentous import. The book begins with a very brief history of Job before his trial, noticing merely such circumstances as were absolutely necessary to the scope of the book, and being merely historical, it is written in the ordinary prose style. It informs us that : " There was a man in the land of Uz, whose name vjos Job ; and that man was peiibct and upright, and one that feared i< ■ ■■1 110 HISTORY OF HEBREW LITERATURE. God, and eschewed evil." Now this verse forms the gi-and theme of the whole poem. The piety of Job gave rise to his trial, and his trial gave afterwards rise to the discu.ssion between him and his three friends. In order to give a full idea of the extent of Job's trial, the aiicount goes on to say that he had been blessed with seven sons and three daughters ; that his substance consisted of seven thousand sheep, and three thousand camels, five hundred yoke of oxen, and five hundred she asses, and a very great household, 60 that he was the greatest of all the men of the east. The horse not being mentioned among Job's possessions, is a proof of the great antiquity of the book, as this animal was not com- mon among the Hebrews until the time of David and Solomon. The mule and ass being used for riding, even by their judges and princes. The sacred writer further tells us, that Job's sons* made a feast, which they celebrated at one ano^per's houses in turn, and which consequently lasted seven days : and that they invited their sisters also to eat and drink wiiu them. This statement indicates the kindly and harmonious feeling that pervaded the whole household of Job. The inspired writer having informed us of the great piety and prosperous conviitiou of Job, next proceeds to tell us what took place concerning him in"f" heaven, from which we learn that Job's * Various conjectures have been advanced as to what kind of a feast alhision is here made. Some writers think there is no reference to any special feast, but that the sons had only in a social manner come to eat and drink together in one another's houses in turn. Against this supposition, howcVer, is the use of the term ntTlSTD (mish-teh) which denotes a festive feast, and not merely an ordinary occasion. Others understand by T^JT" (yomo) his day, his birthday, namely, that the sons celebrated one another's birthday in their respective houses. Now, it is true that from Gen. xl. 20, it appears that the custom of celebrating the birthday is very ancient, at least, it seems to have been so in ^gyp''' "And it came to pass the third day, tohich was Pharaoh's birthday, that he made a feast unto all his servants." Yet this supposition for several reasons seems likewise to be altogether untenable. In the first place the term "1J3T1 d/omo) his day, is never used in the sense of birthday unless the context absolutely requires it, as Job iii. 1. Secondly, it is hardly probable that all the birthdays of the seven sons would come together in succession, they would more likely be dispersed throughout the year with some interval between them. But the language of the text indicates that the feast lasted during seven successive days, at the end of which Job otfered burned oflfcrings. I think, therefore, I it is highly probable that the feast which Job's sons celebrated, was none other than the yearly harvest feast, or spring feast, very commonly observed in ancient times, and which lasted for seven days. , + "The scene in heaven has been imitated by Bayley, in his Festus, and by ■ Goethe in the Proloijue to Faust. It is much to be regretted that a subject •^ like this, where the Deity takes such a prominent part, should have ever been made subservient to the secular drama ; but it becomes still more reprehensible when the author so far forgets himself as to employ language irreverent and j_ e . ^ disrespectful to tte Deity, such as Goethe puts in the mouth of his ideal de :.on. Q^ isv^T^""^*- l/C^ ^^ ^^^ ii**y» imleed please the thoughtless, but its coarseness cannot fail to M ' disgust the proper minded." HISTORY OF HEBREW LITERATURE. Ill calaniities were inflicted as a trial, to prove whether his piet7 would cease with his property ; whether, when i)lunged from the highest pinnacle of happiness into the deepest miseries conceivable, he would still continue to be steadfast in the fear of God. The sequel of the narrative tells us how the good patriarch conducted himself under his heavy afflictions. So mpidly, we are told, did one misfortune succeed upon the other, that before one messenger finished his tale of havoc, another came with still more appalling tidings ; so that Job found him- self, in a i'e'? 114 HISTORY or HIBREW LITKRATUHB. i 31 ii' 2ndly. That there are cases in which the sufferer has a right to iustify himself before Ood, and even repine at Hia decreen under deep affliction. This supposed right Job strenuously maintains against his friends he regarding his cose to be one of these, in which such a liberty is permitted. The discussion is kept up by the contending parties with f^reat skill, and embellished with most eloquent diction ; the anguage becoming gradually more passionate until at last Job silences his three friends, air nains victor. Hut although Job had very properly defende .e principle, that the righteous may sometimes bo subjected to heavy trials, and therefore, to infer from a n.an's mi.sfortunes that ho must be a sinner, is both unreasonable and unjust ; yet, as in the course of the discussion he had made some very extravagant and unwarrantable asser- tions, persisting in the opinion that in many cases the sufferer might justify himself before God, and repino at His decrees, he could not be allowed to keep possession of the field. Another interlocutor consequently steps forward to reason with Job. A young man named Elihu, who had been present and heard the arguments of both parties, but according to the strict rules of etiquette, had refiained from speaking until the more advanced in age had finished; when he perceived that the three friends had nothing more to reply, and the* the discussion apparently was at an end, ventured likewise ' tate his opinion. He begins by expressing his great disap ment at tlie three friends not being able to convince Job of ^us error ; and then addressing himself directly to Job, he endeavours to impress upon hira by the most forcible arguments drawn from God's unlimited sovereignty and unsearchable wisdom, that it was not incon- sistent with Divine justice to afflict even the most righteous, and therefore all calamities should be borne without murmuring, it being our duty humbly to submit to the Divine dispensations. He reproves Job for boasting of his integrity, and for charging God with injustice, and urges upon him that it is for man, who is a sinful creature, to humble himself before God, whose ways are just, and whose judgments are upright. " YeB, Burely God will not do wickedly, I .. And the Almighty will not pervert judgment." — (ch. xxxiv. 12.) The speech of Elihu, which begins at ch. xxxii., and ends with ch. xxxvii., is at once powerful, impressive, and sublime, and had the effect of carrying conviction to the mind of Job. He had listened to the rebukes and admonitions of Elihu without offering a word in reply, although he had challenged him to do so. But eloquent and forcible as Elihu's arguments were in set- ting forth God's justiQe in His dealing with man, yet he also, HISTOAY or HEBREW LITKRATURE. lis with the frienda, peraiHts in maintaining, that no one suffcvB innocently, but that all afflictions must be regarded as punish- ments for sins committed ; and, as they are intended tor cor- rections, they may justly be intliuted even on the most upright. The chief point of the discussion would still have remained undecided, but for the final interposition of God himself, who indeed blnmos Job for not recognising the Divine juntice in everything, and for murmuring at h«s decrees, but not for vindicating his integrity against his friends. Hence we learn from the last chapter that Job, having humbly acknowledged and sincerely repented of his otlence, Ood made an end of hia gufforings, and grunted him renewed prosperity, blessing his latter days even more than before his trial. He deolared Hig displeasure in regard to the three friends, for not having spoken of Uim the thing that is right, as Job had done. The bork of Job will, therefore, ever be to the pious an inexhaustible source from whence he may draw consolation in the time of calamity. If sorrow for a time casts its dismal shades over a once happy home, the book of Job is M'ell calcu- lated to dispel the gloom, and cheer the drooping spirit. If calamity racks the mind and threatens to drive to despair, the book of Job aft'ords solace to the distressed, and directs him to look up to Ilim who will never forsake those of a contrite heart. Or should sickness prostrate the frail body, and make it groan uuilcr excruciating pain, the .uftering of the pious patriarch teiicli<'.s, that under such a visitation may be veiled the Divine ac", and encourage to submit humbly and patiently to the will of a merciful and just Ood. It has been urged by some writers, that whilst the book of Job satisfactorily solves the question, so far as the suffering of the righteous is concerned, it affords no clear solution in regard to the prosperity of the wicked. This, no doubt, is quite true ; but then it must be remembered that the nuiin point of discus- sion must necessarily be the calamities of the righteous, as arising from the innocent suffei'ing of Job ; the prosperity of the wicked is merely incidentally introduced, and forms no direct part of the plan of the book. Indeed, the problem, why the wicked often prosper must ever remain a mystery ; we know it is so, but why, we cannot tell ; human knowledge and human wisdom cannot fathom it. Still, as the book of Job distinctly sets forth that infinite wisdom and justice pervades all the works of the Almighty, it follows that if the wicked be sometimes permitted to prosper, it must be for some wise and just purpose. This is all that seems within the scope of the book, and is all that is necessary for us to know. The book, however, furnishes, many forcible allusions to the transient felicity of the wicked. As for instance, ch. v. 3 : ■Vll-' tig ( ! I It 116 KISTORY OF HEBREW LITERATURE. ^ "I myself have seen," says Eliphaz, "a foolish man, (i. e., wicked man) taking root ; But suddenly I cursed hia habitation." Eliphaz shows here in the example of a sinner, that although he was prosperous, and firmly established, yet quickly matters changed, so that whilst he at first would have pronounced his habitation happy on arrount of such prosperity, and blessed him, regarding him .:s a pious man, he soon saw reason to curse the place as being that of a curse-laden sinner ; for suddenly his well merited misfortunes came upon him. The book of Job is therefore well calculated to teach the wicked, who may be revelling in luxury, that his prosperty is no indication of God's favour, but, on the contrary. His righteous judgments may even overtake him in this world ; so that, where all is happiness to- day, there may be nothing but misery to-morrow. In the Padma-P tirdna and Markandega-Pitrdna, two of the religious works of Braminical Hindoos, is found a legend of sevei'e trial to which a certain Hindoo p» ince had been sub- jected in order to test his piety, which in some respects beai-s such a marked resemblance to the book of Job, that it leaves hardly any doubt but that the principal idea of the legend has been drawn from that book. Many critics have called atten- tion to this circumstance, and among them especially Fried. Schlegel, in his work, " Ueber Sphrache und Weisheit der Indier,"^ 135. As the story may not prove uninteresting to the reader, and as it is also intended to teach a moral lesson, we will here subjoin it. Once upon a time, when the gods and holy ones were assembled in Indras* heaven, there arose a dispute among them on the question whether there existed upon earth a truly pious and virtuous prince. Vasiahthaf, thereupon main- tained that his pupil Harictshandra was in all respects such a prince. 8iva,l however, who was present in the form of * '* Indra, in Hindoo mythology is regarded the chief of the demi-gods, and ranks next to the chief deities who compose the Hindoo Trimurti, i. e., the union of the three great powers or attributes of the godhead personified in Brahma, Vishnu, and Siva ; namely : creation, presei'vation, and destruction." + " Vaaishtha is the name of a celebrated person in xiindoo history and mythology. He is one of the divine persons, and belongs to the class called Rishi, which is a general name for ancient saints and sages. He is frequently spoken of in the romantic history of the Hindoos as being resorted to for advice by royal and other persons requiring spiritual aud other consolation. He is also called the preceptor of the inferior gods." X " Siv.1, as already stated in the first note, is the personification of one of the three great powers. He is generally regarded as the third person in the Hindoo Trimurti. and to represent the destructive energy. He is, however, also the representative of justice, time, the future, and_/Er«," HISTORY OF HEBREW LITERATURE. 117 Viswamitra* sternly replied, that the king's piety and virtue would not stand the test of a severe trial, and that he was prepared to prove the same before all the gods, if the king were given into his power. The challenge was accepted. Siva, in the form of Visvja- mitra, now offered a sacrifice for the king, and demanded as a reward a heap of gold of such a height as could be touched with a cross-bow from the back of an elephant, to be paid at some future time when called upon. The promise was made. Siva now caused the territory of the king to be infested with wild animals, and the king and his queen went out against them. Being overcome with fatigue from the chase, he laid himself down and fell asleep, and dreamed that he was soon to lose his territorj'^, goods, wife, and child. On relating the dream to the queen she said, " be not troubled, Siva will protect us." But soon afterwards, the god appeared to him, and demanded his land and kingdom. Those he gave up. But now, after all had been taken from him, the god demanded also the heap of gold. The king would not deny that he had agreed to pay it, but in full reliance on the assistance of the gods, he promised to fulfill his engagement within forty days. On leaving,' his territory, with his queen and child, Siva sent a dwarf who was to accompany him to Ka^i, a place on the Ganges. On the journey thither, the dwarf placed all kinds of obstacles in their way. When they at last had arrived at Kagi, the dwarf insisted upon being paid for his services. The queen offered herself to be sold, and Brahmin received her ns a slave for a large sum of money, which, however, the dwarf claimed as payment for his services, and which was awarded to him on an appeal to a justice. The king, in order to fulfill his j)ioniise, determined to sell himself also as a slave, and a Pariah })ai(l for him to the dwarf the amovrnt due to Siva. Harictsluindrji was now compelled to perform for his master the Pariah, the most detestable of all labour namel}', to burn at a certain place out of town all the corpses, for which he was to receive in each case for himself a measure of rice, and for his master a *rokl piece and a garment. One day the Brahmin sent the little son of Harictshandra — who had gone with his mother into his service — into the woods to gather wood, a serpent bit the ciiild, !i i i 1 ir '■i! P,. ':i 1 : l-'4f^ * " Viswamitra, is one of the most highly celebrated, and sanctified persons in the sacred legends of the Hindoos. As his name occurs very frciiucutiy in the Veda, {i. e., the Hindoo Scripture,) he must he a porsonaxc of great antiquity. To him is ascribed the honour of having h.id revealeit to hini the hymn which contains the most sacred verse of the Veda, called fft^ (I'lorabk Oayatri or holiest verse of the Veda, which runs as follows : " Ld us lulare the supremacy of that divine sun, the godhead, who illumines all, icho recraitrs all from, whom all proceed, to whom all mtist return, whom we invoke to direct our under- standing aright in our progress towards his holy seat." 16 -f 118 HISTORY OF HEBREW LITERATURE. and the mother found him dead. After shedding many tears, and sorrowing over the child, she brought him to be burned. Harictshandra demanded the rf3gulai' payment ; but as she had nothing but the dress she wore, and on stating that she was Harictshandra's wife, he said that he would forego his portion, but that she must go to her master, and beg from him the necessary sum for the burning of the child, as he could not rob his master of his fee. Soon after this, the son of the king of Ka9i was killed, the wife of Harictshandra found him upon the road, and took him up in her arms. She was seized, and accused of having committed the deed, and sentenced to suffer death. Pariah's slave was ordered to execute her at the place where the dead bodies were burned. Just as he was about to draw the sword, Siva appeared, seized his arm, and announced to him that his kingdom and goods should again be returned to him. His child, also, he restored to him alive. Harictshandra said: " How can I become a king again, when I myself served a Pariah aa a slave, and my wife served a Brahmin ?" Siva replied : " I was the Brahmin and the Pariah, go, and rule thy kingdom with honour. ' All the trials to which Harictshandra was subjected were designed to press from him the falsehood that he had never made the promise to pay such a large sum for the sacrifice which Viswamitra had offered for him to the gods, and thus prove that he was not such a pious and virtuous prince as Vasishtha had represented him to be. THE POETICAL WRITINGS OF MOSES. Mosea, the great lawgiver, has given to the poetry of his nation another turn. Time, we still see in him the poetic genius leaning upon the shepherd's staff, but then his poetry is embellished with rich embroidery which the Bedouin despises. His poetic pictures are chiefly drawn from the motley history of his nation, which he painted with a masterly hand in the most vivid colours. Some of his similes, however, show that he had been educated in Egypt, a striking example of this is furnished in the two first verses of his sublime and spirited address to the Israelites. — (Deut. xxxii :) "Give ear, 0 heavens, and I will speak ; And hear, O earth, the words of my mouth ; My doctrine shall drop as the rain, My speech shall distil as the dew. As the showers upon the tender grass, ' And as the rain upon the green herbs. " The Egyptians portrayed wisdom, doctrine, or learning, and the beneticia' influences derived from them upon their pictorial monuments oy a dew or gentle rain falling upon the parched ground. Moses i', happy in prose as well as in poetry. His style, though e'.sy, is, notwithstanding, spirited ; and his admonitions BISTORT OF HEBREW LITERATURE. 119 to the rebellious Israelites are at once grand and impressive. Professor Wahl, formerly of the University of Leipzig, in speaking of the poetry of Moses, has so beautifully described its merits that I cannot forbear quoting it, although it will lose much of it«» force and beauty in translation. He says : " His poetry is animated, attractive, and comprehensive. The genius of Moses is not feeble ; the stroke of his pinions, as he soars aloft, sends forth the pure harmony of the spheres, cleaves the ether, and pursues the direct path to the sun." The song of Moses by the Red Sea* (Exod. xvi. 19,) is a song of victory ; but all such songs of the Hebrews are at the same time songs of praise to Him who is the disposer of all events. Victory was always looked upon by the pious and faithful of the nation as attained only by the special interposition of the Almighty, and accordingly, the praise of God forms always the most prominent part in their triumphal songs. The address of Moses (Deut. xxxii.) to the assembled Israelites, before his death, is a poem which strikingly dis})lays the poetical powers of its author. The language, whilst it is full of pathos, is at the same time gentle and winning, search- ing the inmost depths of the soul, and well calculated to arouse the slumbering feelings to a lively sensibility of the infinite power, majesty, and mercy of the Almighty. His last prophetic blessing of the children of Israel, Deut. • The Hebrew name is PIO tJ"* (y*""* suph) i. e. the sea of weeds, or sedge, and is so called from the great quantity of sea-weed that ffrowa there. It is stated by several heathen writers that the Ichthyophagi, (t. e. , those Egyptians who lived near the Red Sea, and chiefly maintained themselves by the hsh they caught,) dwelt in huts made of ribs of fish, and covered with sea-weed. The Laglish name of Red Sea is merely a translation of the Latin name Rtcbruni Mare, and which is again a translation from the Greek name Thalassa Ery threa, (t. e. the Red Sea.) Now there are various opinions advanced as to the origin of this name. Some think it was so called from the coral rocks and reefs with which it abounds ; but it is well known that the coral of the Red Sea is white, and hence this supposition must fall to the ground. Others again conjecture that the name is either derived from the reddish colour of the water, or from the red sand at the bottom of it. Rut then, we are told by many writers, that so far from its waters having a red appearance it is rather of a greenish colour, from the great quantity of the sea- weeds and moss that grow in it. According to some Greek writers it received its name from some potent king named Erythros, which means red, who reigned in Arabia ; and some scholars believed that this king Erythros is none other than Eaau, who was named Edom, i. e. red, on account of his having sold his birth-riglit to Jacob for a mess of red pottage. (Gen. xxv. 30. ) From him his descendants were afterwards called Edomites, and the country which they inhabited the land of Edom. Now as the descendants of Edom had spread themselves westward as far as the Red Sea, the sea may probably have been called the Sea of Edom. Indeed Brideaux tella us, (see Connection I. 14, 15,) th.at ancient inhabitants of neighbouring countries called it Yuni Edom {i. e. the Sea of Edom.) The Greeks having mis- taken Edom for an appellation instead of a proper name, accordingly called it Zpvdpa &i\aaaa, the Bed Sea. The part of the sea where the Israelites are supposed to have passed over, near Kolsum, is by the Arabs called Bahr al KoUum, t. e. the sea of destruction. ■'1 120 HISTORY OF HEBREW LITERATURE. XXX. and Psalm xc, entitled " A Prayer of Moses, the Man of God," are other examples of highly poetic and sublime composi- tions of the great lawgiver and prophet. , THE PSALMS. To David, however, belongs the honour of bringing the Lyric poetry of the Hebrews to perfection. From his early youth he evinced a pas.sion for music as well as for poetry. His early years were spent as a shepherd in tending his father's flocks in the field, where he gathered the many flowers which so often adorn his writings. His skill on the harp procured him admittance to the presence of the king, a circum- .stance which must have greatly encouraged him to improve his musical talents with which he was .so highly gifted. Having .several times narrowly escaped with the harp in his hand, the deadly spear which Saul hurled at him through jealousy, he tied into the wilderness of Judea, where he wandered for several years There, in the lonely desert, wandering from place to place, seeking a safe abode, his harp was his comforter and friend. Its melodious toner assuaged his fears, and made him forgetful of hatred and envy. It was not laid aside when brighter days smiled upon him, but still remained his com- panion in the royal palace, where he continued to increase the poetry of his nation ; dangers, conquests, cares, grief, every pious act he performed, presented new matter to him ; and thus we have in the productions of the king of song, a true mirror of his life and time. Hence, Luther calls the Psalms : " a garden where the most beautiful flowers and fruits flourish, but where, at other times also, the most tempestuous winds rage." Although most of the Psalms, no doubt, were composed upon particular occasions, yet there are some which can neitht-r be ascribed to any particular time, nor regarded as referring to any incident in the history of David. Thus, for instance, Psalms i., is strictly a religious song, founded upon the moial maxim : Piety leads to happiness ; Wickedness brings destructiuu. This Psalm is divided into two regular strophes of thr»e verses each ; the first setting forth the happiness of the pious, and the second the fate of the wicked. There are .several othi-r Psalms of similar import, as, for instance, the cxii. and cxxv. Again, we have many hymnji of prai.se and adoration, display ing God's power, majesty, and glory ; as Psalms viii., xix . xxix., &c. In Psalm cxxxiii. we have a beautiful ode uii unity and brotherly love, and Psalm cxxxii., 1., and ex., are purely religious didatic poems. Many of the Psalms possess great sublimity ; but softness, tenderness, and pathos are their HISTORY OF HEBREW LITERATURE, 121 Ian of anposi- ig the s early poetry, ng his flowers e harp sircum- ove his Having ind, the )usy, he ired for ig from )mforter d made ie when lis coni- 'ease the jf, every p,nd thus mirror ms : " a iourish, s ragf." ompost'il neithiT jrring to instance, le moral of thrie he pious, ral other nd cxx\ . display iii., xix . ode oil ex., are posse(^s ire their prevailing characteristics. Bishop Horn has justly remarked that, " The Psalms are an epitome of the Bible, adapted to the purpose of devotion. They treat occasionally of the creation and formation of the world ; the dispensations of Providence, and the economy of grace ; the transactions of the patriarchs ; the exodus of the children of Israel ; their journey through the wilderness, and their settlement in the Holy Land ; their law, priesthood, and ritual; the exploits of their great men, wrought through faith ; their sins and captivities, their repentances and restorations ; their sufferings and victories ; the peaceful and happy reign of Solomon." Well, indeed, might Hooker ask : " What is there necessary for man to know which the Psalms are not able to teach ? And well might Luther say of the Psalms : " Thou readest through them the hearts of all the saints ; and hence the P.salter is the manual of all saints ; for each finds in it, in whatever circumstances he is placed, psalms and words so well adapted for his condition, and so fully according with his feelings, that they seem to have been thus composed for his own sake, insomuch, that he cannot find, or even wish to find any words that are better suited to his case." All the Psalms, with the exception of thirty-four, are furnished with an in.scription. Some of these inscriptions set forth the respective authors of the Psalms. Thus seventy- four* are ascribed to David, twelve to Asaph, eleven'f to the sons of Korah, two to Solomon, one to Moses, one to Heman, (one of the leaders of the temple music ; (see 1 Chron. vi. 33,) and one to Etham, also one of David's singers; (see 1 Chron. vi. 44.) Sometimes the inscriptions state the occasion upon which the Psalms were composed. As for example, the title of Psalm iii. " A Psalm of David when he fled from Absalom his son." Sometimes the inscription indicates the kind of compo- sition to which the Psalm belongs, as b'^Di25?3 {maskil) i. e., a song or poem teachivg wisdom or piety, (Ps. xxxii. 1.) nbStl {tephillah) i. e., a prayer, (Ps. Ixxxvi. 1.) Sometimes, also, the kind of instruments with which the P.salm is to be accompanied, as fil^^^O {neginoth) i. e., stringed instruments, Psalm iv. 1.) mbTl3 {nechiloth) i. e., pipes and flutes, or more likely wind instruments in general. Much obscurity prevails as regards the proper import of some of the terms employed in the inscriptions ; and this arises, no doubt, from the imperfect knowledge we possess of the temple music. Tl>e translators of our authorized version have, there- * To the above the Septua^pnt version adds ten Psalms more, viz., the xxxiii., xliii., xci., xciv. to xcix., and civ. t Asaph was the son of Barachiaa of the tribe of Levi, and was appointed by David to preside over the choral services which he instituted. See 1 Chron. xvi 4, 5, and xxv. "^ ft'' r m IT '; H * ■ ■'■ ,. . ' If. ^li (iii ^; ill J i « 122 HISTORY OF HEBREW LITERATURE. fore, acted very wisely in retaining for the moat part the Hebrew words ; it was far better to retain the original term than to assume a translation based merely upon conjecture. The term tib'O (selah), which occurs seventy times in the Psalms, is commonly regarded to denote rest or pause, and as it stands generally in the middle of a Psalm nt the end of a section or strophe, its use appears to have been to direct the singers in chanting the Psalms to rest or pause, whilst the instruments played an interlude or symphony. This supposition is supported by the authority of the Septuagint, where the term nbO (selah) is always rendered by Sid'^raX/jia i. e., inter- lude or symphony. Solomon seems to have inherited a love of poetry from his father. We are distinctly told, (1 Kings iv. 32,) that he had composed three thousand proverbs, and one thousand and five songs ; of the latter, however, unfoi'tunately only two Psalms and the Song of Solomon, or as it is called in Hebrew ■j'^QJ Cl'itUn (s/ii^* hashshirim) song of songs, are now extant*. In the writings of Solomon we have the precious relics of one who was gifted with " a wise and understanding heart," such as has never been possessed by any human being before or since. It would, therefore, be presumption to dilate upon the excellencies of the productions emanating from a source so richly endowed with heavenly wisdom. PROVERBS. The book of Proverbs furnishes us with a beautiful specimen of proverbial or gnomic poetry of the Hebrews, and is unques- tionably the mo.st exquisite composition of its kind that has ever been penned. It contains about five hundred short and impressive sayings, the result of the profoundest human sagacity, replete with solemn truths, wholesome and tender admonitions ; addressing themselves with equal aptitude to the king on the throne, and the suppliant beggar, to the aged as well as to the young. Who would not gather such "apples of gold with * As early as one hundred years before the Christian era, the apocrypha book called "The Wisdom of Solomon," appeared, which is still extant in the Greek, purporting to be the production of that monarch. Its style, however, is unlike that of Solomon, and it contains expressions and ideas which prove that it originated in the Alexandrian school. Indeed, from the quotations from the prophets Isaiah and Jeremiah it would appear that the author, whoever he may have been, had no desire to pass it off as a composition of that monarch. The " Book of Wisdom," however, has justly been admired for the lofty aud sublime ideas of the Deity which it contains, and for the highly moral tendency of its precepts. Regarding the apocryphal books in general, it may be remarked, that they were neld in higher esteem by the P'gyptian than the Palestine Jews ; they were, however, by both read as valuable religions and moral writings, aud so used by them as an appendix to the Old Testament before the Christian era. pecimen HISTORY OF HEBREW LITERATUttK. 12S fiorures of silver."* (Eng. ver. : " apples of gold in pictures of silver.") Prov. xxv. 11. As brevity gives life to the proverb, the Hebrew hnguage is particularly well adapted to this species of composition, but must necessarily lose much of its pointedness and vigour by translation into any of our modern languages. From the following example taken at random, the reader will be able to form some idea of the correctness of what I have stated : keli latttsoreph waiyetar m'lkkaaeph air/im har/o •'bs qi2b ^:v^ qos^ Q^iliD i:in a Tesael. for the and there shall from the the dross Take , refiner go forth silver (Ch. away xxv. 4.) It will be seen that there are only six words '.n Hebrew, whilst there are no less than seventeen in the Erii^lish transla- tion. The following has likewise seventeen words in the English version, but only seven in the original : "Take away the wicked /ro>« before the king And his throne shall be established in righteousness." Although every nation has its proverbs, yet the people of the east seemed to have had a special fondness for such senten- tious sayings. With them they appear to have been a favour- able mode of instruction, as peculiarly fitted to im|)ress the mind and imprint the truth more lirmly on the memory. The Proverbs of Solomon, however, form a distinct class, altogether unlike those of other nations. The latter, it is true, often inculcate certain rules of conduct, or of caution which experience has shown to be useful for some end or purpose. Some' of them even convey moral instruction ; take, for example the German proverb : " Unschuld und ein gut Gewissen Sind ein sanftes Ruhekissen." i. e., " Innocence and a good conscience are a soft pillow." * The Hebrew word HT'3'J2J?3 {maskiyoth) which I have rendered hyfirjurex, occurs in the singular, Ezek. viii. 12, "eveiy man in the chamber of his imagery," winch appear from verses 10 and 11 to have been chambers of which the walls were painted with pictures of idols, to which the idolatrous Israelites paid adoration. It occurs again, Lev. xxvi. 1, f|^3t2))3 THi^ (even viaakUh\ where it means a stone with the image of an idol. In Numbers xxxiii. 52, it occurs in the plural, where, no doubt, it means images made of wood and stone. (Eng. vers., " pictures.") And so, no doubt, in the above passage it means images of silver, artfully worked into the apples of gold to increase their beauty. Some have rendered "apples of gold in baskets of silver," but the word ri''D'l2)72 (maakith) occurs nowhere in the sense of basket, and such a rendering is, therefore, not authorized. By the " apples of gold" we understand such as may have been used as orna- ments of dress, or for adorning vessels. 'i: ii^ * ! .: ! f ^■ .1: ]L i;i !i ill f li *.■ ' -'1^: IhI 124 HISTORY OF HEBREW LITERATURE. i*!" '.# s Still there are others which have quite a contrary tendency, setting forth |)rincif)lesi altogether at variance with true religion. As, for example: " Noth hat kein Gobot. " i.e., "Necessity haS no law." The Proverbs of Solomon, on the other hand, furnish nothing but truly wise and holy precepts, calculated to promote Ijotn the moral and religious culture of the people. They constitute a mine of Divine wisdom, and, like a brilliant luminary, diffuse their heavenly light. Well might the learned and pious Jerome in advising one of his friends, in regard to the education of his daughter, recommend to have her iustructud in the Proverbs of Solomon for godly life. The book of Proverbs consists of several independent collec- tions. The fii'st ten chapters form an unbroken discourse, the subject of which is almost entirely the praise of wisdom and the Idessings it confers on those who diligently seek after it. From chapter x. to chapter xxii, 16, we have a collection of desidtory aphorisms on various topics. At chapter xxii. 17, the stylo again alters, assuming an admonitory tone, with a closer connection of sentences similar to that of the first ten chapters and continues so to chapter xxv., when the di.scon- nected proveibs recommence. The thirtieth chapter, according to its title, contains the proverbs of another sage : " The words of Agur the son of Jakeh, the saying (Eng. ver. " the pro- phecy") wJdck^ the man spake unto Ithiel, even Ithiel and Ucal." Agur is altogether an unknown personage, for this is the only place where his and his father's name are mentioned. Jerome and several Jewish commentators considered Agur to be merely a symbolical name of Solomon ; in that case the name might denote a collector, i. e. one who collects wise say- ings or i)roverbs, just as he is in Ecclesiastes called kokeleth, i. e., one addressing assemblies, namely, a preacher. But if this supposition is correct, how are we to explain the statement, " son of Jakeh ? " Is Jakeh merely another name for David ? And even if this could be satisfactorily established, the question would then arise, why Solomon should be called the son of Jakeh, whilst everywhere else he is spoken of as the son of David ? Furthermore, if Solomon really were the author of chapter xxx., how could we reconcile his statement, in verse 2 : ' • Truly I am more *8tupid than an;/ man. And do not possess the understanding of men. " with his statement in Eccl. i. 16 : " I communed with my heart saying, behold I have obtained great wisdom and added tliereto above all that were before me in Jerusalem ; and my heart has learned wisdom and kziowledge." * Not necessrrily " more brutish," as rendered in the English version. HISTORY OF HEBREW LITERATURE. 125 It is, therefore, far more likely that Agur was an inspired writer and teacher, and that he /"Jdressed the maxims con- tained in the chapter to Ithiel and Ueal, who probady were two of his disciples, and that they were afterwards incorporated with those of Solomon. In chapter xxxi., 2 to 9 inclusive, we have the prudential maxims addressed to ki ij^' Lemuel by his mother. Hut here we are again brought fiice to face with the question, as to who this king Lemuel was. The name occurs only in verses 1 and 4 of this chapter ; and we have, therefore, no opportunity of appealing for information to any other passage. According to some Rabbinical commentators, Lemuel is only another name for Solomon, but then it would not be an ea.sv matter to furnish a satisfactory answer to the question, why Solomon should just in these two places be called Lemuel. Even if the conjecture of Gesenins were correct, that the name b&^l^b (Lemuel) signifies "o/ God, i. e., created," or probably devoted to God, the derivation would not furnish a satisfactory answer. Hitzig, and many other German writers, legard him to have been a king or chief of an Arab tribe dwelling on the borders of Palestine, and an elder brother of Agur. Whilst others, as Eichhorn and Ewald suj)pose that licmuel is merely a poetical appellation, employed by the author of these maxims, which are intended for the guidance of a king, for the purpose of putting in a striking form the lessons which they conveyed, signifying as it does to God, oi devoted to God. They say, the name is in keeping with the whole sense of the passage, which contains the portraiture of a virtuous king. This sui>position, we must say, is exceedingly far fetched, and highly improbable. The language in the two first verses clearly indicates that king Lemuel was a real person, and that the maxims were ad it- ', ? '^mi !i: Mi ''f:\ i 'ill 126 HISTORY OF HEBREW LITERATURE. I . I two lines, according to the number of letters of the Hebrew alphabet, the word of every line commencing with a letter in its order as it stands in the alphabet, so that the first line begins with the letter j^ [aleph) a, the second with ^ (heth) h, and so on. There are other alphabetical poems of this kind, which will be noticed hereafter. ■• 1 .. ECCLESIASTES. The book of Ecclesiastes may be called a sermon in the garb of highly poetic diction. Its text i.s, " Vanity of vanitie.s, all is vanity,*' (Ch. i. 2,) a fundamental truth upon which the preacher enlarges, setting forth his own convictions regarding the uselessness and utter nothingness of all things appertain- ing to this life, interspersing his discourse here and there with sentences of wisdom and rules of life, and finally concluding his remarks with the brief, but comprehensive exhortation : " Let us hear the conclusion of the whole matter : fear God and keep his commandments ; for this is the whfile iliitif of man. For God will bring even- work into judgment, with every secret thing, whether it be good or evil."- (ch. xii. 13, 14.) As much as to say, from what has been said regarding the vanity of all earthly enjoyments, or things appertaining to this life, the conclusion is, that it is the highest folly for man to Hfb his affections upon them, seeing that life passes away liken shadow, but let him rather fear God and keep his command- ments, by which alone he can secure that happiness in the life to come, which endureth for ever. The Hebrew name of this book is flbtlp {Koheleth) i, e., one who addresses a public assembly, hence a preacher. The name " Ecclesiastes" in the English version is merely a transcript of tlie Greek word 'EKK\r) God has implanted in nature, these are unchangeable, the sun pursues its regular course, the rivers continually flow into the sea, and yet the sea becomes no fuller, &c. t i ' F i ■r I i It k h 1 ::i 130 BISTORT OF HEBREW LITERATURE. At verse 12, however, the preacher commences to give his own experience, and the conclusion he has arrived at regard- ing the vanity of all human affairs. He commences his state- ment by declaring : " J, the preacher, have been king over Israel." As much as to say, I have had thus a full opportunity of forming a proper opinion regarding the enjoyments and |jleasurea of this life. In making his statement, the sacred writer naturally assumes the narrative style, and thus very appropriately uses the first person preterite : " I have been king;" (v. 12.) "I have given my heart; (v. 13.) " I have seen all the works ;" (v. 14.) " I have communed with my heart;" (v. 16.,) and so throughout this and the following chapter. But does the use of ffri'^n (hayithi,) " I have been,' necessarily imply t/iat he had ceased to be king ? Surely no more than if the Queen were to say, '• I have been reigning over England," would imply that she had ceased to reign. But let us take a Biblical example. In Exod. ii. 22, we read, "And she bore him a son, and he called his name Gershom :* for he said "'tT'in (hayithi) I have been a stranger in a strange land." But Moses was still a stranger in the land of Midian when he uttered these words, and was so for a considerable time afterwards. Hence Kalisch and others have rendered " I am a stranger," and this is quite admissible, for, as I have already stated, the Hebrew has only two tenses, namely : a preterite and future, the former is used to express the present as well as the past. In the second place, it is argued that many expressions in reference to oppression, judicial injustice, and the elevation of fools and inferior persons to high places are not suitable to Solomon's times, but rather depict the depraved state of society as prevailing at a much later period in the history of the Hebrews. That if Solomon were indeed the author of the book, such a demoralized and wicked state of affairs would he a splf-accusation, and altogether contrarj^ to what would he expected to exist under the rule of such a pious and wise king. To all this it may be replied, that the author of the book does not refer to any special time, or any particular country or nation, but speaks of evils which exist more or less at all times. and hence he saj^s: "and also the heart of the sons of men /> full of evil, and ioWy is in their heart during their life." — (eh. ix. 3.) A wise and far famed king, like Solomon, could not have failed to be cognizant of the doings in other royal courts, and as an inspired writer he would be just as able to speak of tho demoralized state of the Israelites in later times, as Jacob with QlQJ'^^ (Oershom) the name denotea a stranger there. HISTORY OF HEBREW LITERATURE. 131 a prophetic eye could foresee what should befall his sons in future days, or Isaiah with the greatest precission describe the downfall of Babylon. There is, therefore, no necessity to suppose that Solomon alludes to evils existing at any particular time, but rather speaks of evils as commonly prevailing among mankind. This view^ will be found fully sustained by the very passages, that the opponents of the Solomonic authorship appeal to. The existence of unrighteous judgment, (ch. iii. 16,) is spoken of as follows : •' And, moreover, I saw under the sun, in the place of judgement there was wickedness ; and in the place cf justice, impiety. " It will be seen, Solomon speaks here of evils, not confined to any particular place or country, or as restricted to any par- ticular time, but as existing " under the sun," that is, upon the whole earth. Further, when Solomon says : " I saw under the sun," it does by no means follow that he meant as having actually seen it w^ith his own eyes, for the Hebrews, like other people, use the verb to see sometimes in reference to what we perceive by means of hearing; as for example. Gen. xlii. 1, " And Jacob saw that there was corn in Egypt," but Jacob did not see it himself, he only heard of it, hence he says in verse 2, ' Behold I have heard that there is corn in Egypt." When we pass on to what Solomon says in respect tt> tlespotic oppression, ch. iv. 1, we find that there also he uses similar language : "And again I saw all the oppressions tliat are done under the sun : and behelil the tears of the oppressed, and they had no comforter ; and from the hand of their oppressors thei-e was violence ; and they had no consoler. " Here again Solomon speaks of oppression as existing upon earth, and not in reference to any particular place or country, and both sacred and secular history ani|)ly testify to the truth of the statement. But according to 1 Kings, xii. 4, there was iQUch oppression even in Solomon's time. During his reign, too, there was a change of dynasty in Egypt. The Pharoah king of Egypt, whose daughter Solomon had married, belonged to the twenty-first dynasty, under whose reign the country seems to have fallen into anarchy, whilst Shishak,(or Shasl ank. according to the hieroglyphic inscriptions,) to wlioui Jeroboam tied from the pursuit of Solomon, was the first king of the twenty-second dynasty. This will account for how it happened that Jeroboam found an asylum in Egypt, which would hurdly have been aflforded to him b}^ the father-in-law of Solomon. When we come to examine what Solomon .says in regard to incompetent kings and a riotous court, we find the language he uses as applicable now as it was in bygone days : ;!-H Mil i If it K If ' P 11' ' 132 HISTORY OF HEBREW LITERATURE. " Woe to thee, 0 land, when thy king is a child, and the princes eat (i. e., fare sumptuously) in the morning. Happy art thou, O land, when thy king is a noble*, and thy princes eat at the right time, for strength, and not for drunkenness.— (ch. x. 16, 17.)" The word 1^5 {na-ar,) employed in the above passage, does not only denote a child, or boy, but is also sometimes used in the sense of lad, or young man. Thus, in Genesis xxxvii. 2, Joseph is called a 13?5 (na-ar,) though he was then " seventeen years old." Solomon evidently uses the word here to express perfect incompeterce, a weak-minded person, who performs childish acts, who has no judgment of his own, and is easily influenced bv others. " And the princes eat in the morning ;" the verb ^355 {achat) is not used here in its ordinary sense merely to eat, for that would imply that it was wrong to take breakfast, but is used here rather in the sense of to feast, or at least, to eat merely for the sake of eating. To feast in the morning was considered by the ancients an act of dissipation, hence Isaiah inveighs against such an indul- gence : " Woe unto them, who rise early in the morning, that they may follow strong drink."— (Isra. v. 2.) The elevation of fools and mean persons into important offices, whilst the rich and princes are occupying low positions, is also spoken of in such a manner as implying that such occur- rences are quite common, and not confined to a particular period or country. " Folly is set in many high places, and the rich sit in lowness. (i. e., low- places. ) I have seen servants upon horses ; a.ud princes like servants walking on foot."— (ch. V. 6, 7.) " Foll}^" is here personified as often oecu|)ying many high and honourable positions, whilst " the rich" are frequently fouiifl in very humble stations. By the " rich" we must, however, not understand the rich in tvealth, but rather the rich in knowledyc, for it stands here in opposition to " ' Uy." Besides, it is by no means uncommon to ascribe to the Wc7i a certain amount of ahrewdness and ivisdom by which they obtained their riches. It will now be seen, that the passages which we have been considering do not present an / ditticulty in ascribing the authorship cf the book to Solomon. It is, however, not so much upon the arguments founded upon these j^:assages, as upon the •When thy king is a noble," i. e., noble minded, noble in disposition as well as noble by birth, it is witli this accessory signification that the term Q'l'^Tn "13 C"'" choriiii) iwble is evidently here used. eat (i. e., 368 eat at ^e, does used in cxvii. 2, venteen express •erforms is easily ( (achal) for that : is used erely for ients an an indul- illow strong tnportant positions, ch occur- )articular 1. (i. e., low walking on lany high itly found Ivever, not hiowledyc, , is by no .nount of sir riches, we have gibing the so much lupon the isposition as [at the term HISTORY OF HEBREW LITERATURE. 133 character of the language employed in the book, that the advo- cates for a later origin chiefly depend in establishing their theory. Indeed it may be safely asserted that had it not been for this obstacle, the opponents to the Solomonic authorship would be comparatively insignificant in number. No one capable of forming an opinion on the subject will deny, that in certain passages the language presents some difficulty in accounting for its presence in a work purporting to be written in an age when one would expect to find the language in its purest state, an age not unaptly called the golden age of Hebrew literature. At the same time, however, every unbiassed inquirer will also have to admit, that the foreign element which many critics imagined to have discovered has been greatly exaggerated. The Greekisms, for instance, which Zirkle and Schmidt supposed they had discovered, not having been seen by any other critic, have now been abandoned. The same has been the case with the Rabbinisms, which some few writers thought they had found. There remain, therefore, only the Chaldaisms to be accounted for ; and these, as Dr. Herzfeld, in his " Koheleth ubersetzt und erldutert," (i. e., Ecclesiastes trans- lated and explained,) has justly observed, require to be greatly sifted. Indeed, according to this eminent Rabbi, there are only between eight or ten Chaldaisms, and between twelve and fifteen young w^ords, which he very properly considers not sufficient to disprove the Solomonic authorship, for we could suppose that Solomon in such a philosophical work may not have found the pure Hebrew language sufficient, and had there- fore recourse to the sister dialect, the Chaldee. Preston supposPii " that many of the forms which we call Aramaic, may have belonged to the period of pure Hebrew, though they have not come down to us in any extant writings, and so far as they are foreign to the Hebrew of that time, Solomon may have learned them from his strange wives, or from men who came as ambas- sadors from other countries. — (Preston EccL, p. 7.) If this sup- position of Preston could be relied on, it would at once remove the chief obstacle in the way to regarding Solomon as the author of the book. There can be no doubt that modern critics in their search for Chaldaisms, in a most unaccountable way, have mistaken Hebrew for Chaldee forms. In ch. 1, 2, for example, the form b^n {havel) has been taken as a Chaldee form, where, in reality, it may be regarded merely as a construct form of b!lO (hevel) vanity, for although Segoletk iioaiis as a rule undergo no change in ])assing into the construct state, yet there are quite a number of exceptions to this rnje, as every Hebrew scholar must 18 , . , ! it :';! 'I mm 134 HISTORY OF HEBREW LITERATURE. ^ 11 I- ■ be well aware of. Thus, for example, "l^tt {sheger) a fcetus construct i^ttf (shegar) (Deut. viii. 13; xxviii. 18 — inn {cheder) a chamber, const, "lin (chadar) ^11 Sam. iv.7,) and other similar examples might be adduced. Upon what reasonable grounds then, I would ask, is tho form b'2n (havel) in Ecclesiastes to be regarded as a Chaldaism, whilst similar forms in the very earliest books are permitted to pass as pure Hebrew forms ? No less arbitrar}^ is the assumption that nouns ending in 'y (an) "IT (on) or f^ri (tith) as V5? {inyan) an affair or thing. (Ed. ii. 26,) linri'' (yithron) profit, (ch. i. 3,) tllbpt) (sichluth) folly, (ch. ii. 3,) are of a much later origin,having younger Hebr^jw forms. If it could be satisfactorily established that those endings, especially belong to the young-^r Hebrew, then all the books of the Old Testament without a single exception, must share the same fate as the book of Ecclesiastes, for these forms are of common occurrence in all the books. Not to take up much space, we will only give two examples of each from the earliest books, ^TibXO (schulchan) a table Exod. xxv. 23,) '^S"lp, (Korban) an offering, (Lev. i. 2,) '^1'OJi^'l {rishon) first, (Gen. xxii. 18,) ']i5')a« (Shimon) Simeon (Gen. xxix. 33,) t^^)2^ (de'iYiuth) likeness (Gen. i. 26,) HiTllS^abfe^ {almanuth) her widow- hood.— (Gen. xxxviii. 14. The frequent occurrence of "0* [she) the fragment of the relative pronoun "Tflji^ (asher) which, in Ecclesiastes, has also been brought forward as a proof of the later origin of the book. But we find this fragment already employed several times in Judges, as V. 7; vi. 17: vii. 12; Ps. cxlvi. 5, In the Song of Solomon it is almost exclusively employed, which seems to indicate that the royal author was rather partial to its use. The reason why it is not foun'^. in the Proverbs may be accounted for, by the relative pronoun not being often used in that book. The fact, however, that the fragment tf nowhere entirely supplanted the full form "TOi^ (asher) clearly indi- cates that the former was only used for some rhetorical purpose, probably for euphony, in order to produce roundness of expre.s- sion. 1'his is evidently the reason for its use in Ps. cxlvi., where the fragment XD (she) occurs twice, namely verses 3, 5, and the full form I'QJ&ft (asher) once, namely verse 6. On refer- ring to the original, it will at once be perceived that in verses 3, 5, the fragment aftbrds a far more euphonic reading than the fullfo'i^m, would do, whilst in verse 6 the full form decidedly lends smoothness to the sentence. HISTORY OF HEBREW LITERATURE. 13S It must necessarily often prove a futile attempt in our endea< vouring in all cases to discover the reason for the use of pecu • liar phraseology employed by the sacred writers. They wrote in their native language, and when it still was a living tongue. To us the Hebrew is a foreign and dead language. We know, as a fact, that critics and interpreters are very often not agreed on the meaning of words. As an illustration of the difficulty that presents itself sometimes in explaining a peculiar phrase- ology, we may instance the expression Vifc^ ItTTl (chayetho erets,) (Gen. i. 24,) which literally translated would read, "his beasts of the earth," but which would not make sense : it must be rendered, " the beasts of the earth." How, then, is the form of the word ifTTl {chayetho) to be explained. If the first chapter of Genesis were written in poetiy in that case, there would be no difficulty in regarding the form of the word as a poetical construct, but we have in the chapter nothing but the simplest prose composition, and a poetical form is, therefore, altogether out of place. Some critics have, indeed, supposed that inasmuch as God is speaking in that verse, the sacred writer, therefore, employed the more dignified language ; this may possibly be the case. At any rate, it is the only attempt at the solution that we at present know of that can be made. But then, it may fairly be asked, why should this dignified language just be employed in that place, and not in any other passage in the chapter where God is represented likewise to speak ? This question, we do not hesitate to say, could only be answered by the author himself, who, no doubt, had a reason for using that form in that particular place, which we are at present unable to define. As another example of the great difficulty that sometimes exists in accounting for the employment of words, we may instance the use of QiJibi^ [Elohim) Goii, in some portions of Scripture, and niH"' (Yehovah) Jehovah in others, whilst in others again, t3"'nb&5 mH'' (Yehovah Elohim,) Lord God is employed. The use of the different names of the Deity has been laid hold of by the rationalistic school to kindle a flame, wherewith is sought to consume the authenticity of the whole of the Old Testament. It has given rise to a controversy which has shaken Germany to its. very centre, and soon made its effects to be felt also throughout Europe, ) nd to some extent even in America. It has produced a liteia,uure per se. In endeavouring to account for the use of the different names of the Deity, the most extravagant theories have been advanced. It is strenuously maintained by these rationalistic writers, that the occurrence of the different names of the Deity in portions Vi .1! ■hii ~h ^T-o tc'vvn'vv^i ) •^P- V" ■0-' -/Q., V- ■\/^yy~t-\A..-, ■> ^-O'- uyy t/<^^v- A- \Arvw*^A^ ^-^il » 136 HISTORY OF HEBREW LITERATURE. m of the Pentateuch indicate that these portions were written by different authors, so that Moses in reality had nothing what- ever to do with the composition of the five books of M(jses. But as by whom they were written, or the precise time when they were composed, they are far from bein^ agreed among themselves. But, it so happens, that in very many instances there is not the slightest difficulty in assigning a reason why the sacred writer employed one name in preference to the other, and hence, we may safely conclude, that in other passages where the reason for their use is not quite so obvious to us at present, the sacred writer was also guided in his choice by some exist- ing cause. As the Elohistic and the Jehovistic controversy now takes such a prominent part in ^^he Old Testament exegesis, it will be our duty in a future number to deal moie fully with this sub- ject ; we will then, we hope, be able to point out to the reader in a satisfactory manner, the utter fallacy of, not to sa}'^ absur- dity, of the document theory, which has, within this century, attracted so much attention, and has been productive of unspeakable evil in the religious world. We have here merely alluded to it, to show that the five books of Moses fare no better at the hands of our modern critics than the book of Ecclesiastes does. So far, however, we have otdy examined the arguments that are brought forward against the Solomonic authorship; let us, in the next place, see what may be advanced in favour of it. In the first place then, we may observe that whatever doubt there might exist as to who is to be understood by the appella- tion Jnbnp {Kokeletk) 'preacher in the first verse, is at once removed by the following explanatory statements that he was " the son of David" and " king in Jerusalem," and hence can be no other than Solomon. This is further confirmed by the statement in ch. i. 12, "I (Koheleth) jyreacher have been king over Israel in Jerusalem." Here then, we have a positive declaration pitted against the vague assertion that the book was composed by some unknown person, at some equally unknown period, for, as already stated, the time a.-.signed for its composition by different writers extends over 800 years. Again, it is quite certain, that as much as the book was admitted among the canonical books it must have been written by an inspired writer, what reason could the author hnve had to write under an assumed name, and not in his own v>s all the other inspired writers did ? The opponents to the Solomonic author- ship ought to have furnished at least some plausible answer to this que.stion. Dr. Delitzsch oh.serves: " As the author of the Wisdo^H of Solomou openly gives himself out to be an Alex, HISTORY OF HEBREW LITERATURE. 187 tten by f what- : MoHes. le when among istances why the her, and s where present, ne exist- iw takes t will be this sub- le reader ly absuv- century, active of :e merely 1 fare no J book of ents that p ; let us, r of it. vev doubt appella- at once bt he was ee can be by the )een king positive the book equally led for its I. Again, admitted 3n by an ll to write Ithe other Ic author- Inswer to |(>r of tlie I an Alex. andrian, who makes Solomon his organ, so the author of the book of Kohe'eth is so little concerned purposely to veil the fiction of the Solomon discourse, in which he clothes his own peculiar life experiences, that he rather in diverse w.ays discovers himself as one and the same person with the Solomo redivivua here presenting himself." — {Com. on the Cant, and Eccl. p. 208.) With all due deference to the learned commen- tator, we must say that the " Wisdom of Solomon" is no parallel case to "Ecclesiastes." In the former book not the slightest hint is given who the author is, and all that can be said on this point with any degree of probability is, that it was written by an Alexandrian Jew. It is quite evident, also, from the citations of the prophets Isaiah and Jeremiah that the author had no wish to pass it off as the composition of Solomon, and probabl}' merely gave it that title to indicate the great importance of its teaching. We frequently speak of a saying, that it is worthy of an Aristotle or a Plato, or Socrates^ to indicate the importance we attach to it. At the time when the authors of the books of the " Wisdom of Solomon" and "Ecclesiasticus" lived the learned of the Jewish nation devoted especially much attention to illustrate Wisj)OM from the Holy- Scriptures as the only true and safe guide by which the actions of m.in should be shaped. "All wisdom," says Sirach, " Cometh from the Lord, and is with him for ever. The root of wisdom is to fear the Lord, and the branches thereof are long life." — (Ecclesiasticus i. 1, 2.) The distinct declarations in ch. i. 1, 12, appear to me clearly to indicate that Solomon was the real author of Ecclesiastes. In the second place, there are j)assages in the book which evidently refer to actual occurrences in the life of Solomon,, and harmonize with the history given of him in 1 Kings. As for example, Eccl. i. 16 : " I communed with my own heart, saying : Behold I have obtained great wisdom and added thereto above any one that was before me over Jerusalem ; and my heart has sf^en wisdom and know- ledge." The expression, " I have obtained great wisdom," refers to his supernatural endowment with wisdom mentioned in 1 Kings iii. 12 : " Behold I have given thee a wise and understanding heart ; so that there was none like thee before thee, neither after thee shall any arise like thee." See, also ch. iv. 30. The expression, " and added thereto," refers to his increase in wisdom by study and research. There exists great difficulty in rendering n?a3n "iplBDim "^nblrkn {higdalti iveho- aaphti chochmah,) into good English, and still bring out the full force of the two verbs before the noun. In the English version it is freely rendered, "I am come to great estate, and have gotten more wisdom :" but this rendering does not convey 19 1 . m Vm V^\ « :; I I ¥ ■' I III 138 HISTORY OF HEBREW LITERATURE. the meaning of the original, both verbs refer to " wisdom." Delitzsch has rendered, " I have gained great and always greater wisdom ; but this rendering implies that all the wis- dom which Solomon possessed was gained by his own exertion, and leaves his divinely endowed wisdom altogether out of the question. The literal rendering of the verb ''tlSDim (weho- ^apkti,) undoubtedly is, ** and I have added," i. e., to that which had been bestowed upon him. The difficulty of properly rendering the two verbs has led to the passage being generally freely translated : " Behold I have obtained more wisdom than a,ny one who was before me over Jerusalem." So Rabbi Herz- feld, and many others. In order to bring out the full force of the two verbs I have, in my rendering above, translated one oi the verbs before the noun and the other after it, and supplied thereto. It has been urged that the expression, " above any one that was before me over Jerusalem," indicates that the author of the book must have lived at a much later period who had a long list of kings behind him ; that Solomon himself could not have consistently said so, since he had only one predecessor, namely, his father David, who for the first time completely subdued Jerusalem. — (See 2 Sam. v. 7.) But surely there is nothing in the language to imply that Solomon merely refers to kings of his own nation. There had been reigning in Jerusalem Canaanitish kinj^s before the Israelites obtained possession of the Holy Lai J. (See Josh. x. 1.) Nay even in the time of the patriarch Abraham, Melchizedek, who befriended the patriarch, is called kinsr of Salem. — Gen xiv. 18.) It is supposed that Melchizedek, founded it about 2023 B. C,, and called its name Salem, i. e., peace. A century after- wards it was captured by the Jol)Msites, who constructed a citadel on Mount Zion, and they called the city Jebus. But when David finally expelled the Jebusites, and made it the capital of his kingdom, he again restored the old name and called it Jerusalem, i. e., possession of peace, or, according to some critics, dwelling of peace. Seeing then that from very ancient times kings had resided in Jerusalem, Solomon could consistently use the expression, " above any one that was before me." Again, ch. ii. 8, we read, " I gathered me also silver and gold, and peculiar treasure of kings and of countries." This perfectly agrees with what is said of Solomon, 1 Kings ix 28 : *' And they came to Ophir, and fetched from thence gold, four hundred and twenty talents, 1 e., $11,407,500. See also ch.x. 10 to 25. In verse 14 it is distinctly stated : " And the weight of the gold that came to Solomon in one year was six hundred and sixty-six talents of gold," i. e. $18,231,750. And in verse riadom." always the wis- jxertion, it of the n {wehjo- at which properly generally [on* than )bi Herz- l force of ed one ot supplied ' one that author of rho had a could not edecessor, ompletely ly there is rely refers jigning in [ obtained ^ay even idek, who -Gen xiv. .bout 2023 jury after- structed a Ibus. But tde it the [name and iording to ■rom very )mon could |was before silver and ^es." This igs ix 28 : gold, four I also ch.x. the weight hundred Id in verse mSTOBT OF HBBREW LITERATURE. 139 23, it is summed up, " And king Solomon exceeded all the kings of the earth for riches and For wisdom." The reader will observe, not the kings of Jerusalem only, but " all the kings of the earth." We may, in the next place, turn to Eccl. vii. 26 : " And I found more bitter than death the woman, because she is like hunting nets, and her heart is like snares, her hands are bands : whoso pleaseth God shall escape from her ; but the sinner is caught by her." This is not language such as an imaginary Solomon would employ, but of a man who speaks from actual experience, and we need only turn to 1 Kings, xi. 3 to 12, and we will there find a full explanation of the strong language employed in the above verse. It must, however, not be sup- posed that this harsh language was intended to apply to women in general ; the history of the Israelites furnish many examples of good and noble women. " And I found more bitter than death," clearly shows that he has reference to his own expe- rience, and that he refers to his many wives and concubines, who obtained such mastery over him as to turn " his heart after other gods," and cause him to do evil in the sight of God, in consequence of which the greater portion of his kingdom was afterwards to be taken from his son Rehoboam. And although Solomon was told that this affliction, for his father David's sake, would not come upon his house in his life time, yet we can readily understand when the aged king began to reflect upon the enormity of his conduct, and that it was all owing to his weakness in permitting himself to be led astray by the strange women of his court, that brought such dreadful punish- ment upon his house, his remorse must have been profound, and his grief intense ; and no wonder that he should have given vent to his feelings in such strong language as is contained in the above verse. There are many other passages in the book which evidently refer to actions of Solomon and occurrences in his reign, and therefore are full of import as uttered by himself, but would be perfectly meaningless if coming from the mouth of a merely visionary Solomon. Thirdly, as we have already stated, tradition and all Rabinic and Patristic writers ascribe the book to Solomon. Even Renan regards the book to be an old Solomonic work, though it may have been revised by a more recent hand. (" Histoire des Langues Sdmetiques.") The Jews held the book in such high esteem, and regarded it of such importance, that it was incorporated into their Liturgy, and directed it to be read on the first day of the Feast of Tabernacles. Fourthly, the few foreign words which occur in the book, i'"i l;:^ I ly ■:i| 140 DISTORT OF HEBREW UTERATURB. and upon which the adverse writers lay so much stress as positively indicating it to be " the product of the post-exilian period," do not in themselves furnish sufficient data by which the age of such an ancient book could, with any certainty, be fixed. It is impossible for us, at this distance of time, to form the slightest idea at what period these foreign words may have been adopted, or to wiiat extent they may have been used when the Hebrew was still a spoken language. Had not so many of the ancient Hebrew works been lost, we might probably gather from them more information on this point. It is by no means a strange thing, that with the extension of intercourse with foreign countries, words should be adopted from one language into another. We received the word damask with the rich silk stuff that was originally made at Damascus ; and now we use the word damaak, even as a verb, in speaking of decorative silk or other materials with raised flowers. The Engli.sh language furnishes many other examples of this kind. Now, we have already seen that in the reign of Solomon Sanscrit and Malabar words found their way into the Hebrew language through commerce carried on with India (see Introduction, p. 36), and why should not, in a similar manner, some words be adopted from languages spoken in neighbouring countries ? But let us for a moment look at a few of those foreign words which seem to form such an obstacle in the way to the Solomonic authorship of the book. The first we shall notice is the word* d^B {pardea) a plea- sure garden or park. (Eccl. ii, 6.) Solomon used the word already in Cant. iv. 13. The Persians employed this word to designate, by it, the pleasure grounds or parka which sur- round the royal palaces, and it is maintained that the Hebrews borrowed it from them. Now, take it for granted that sucli was really the case, where is the difliculty in supposing that Solomon, in constructing for himself such pleasure grounds, very probably in imitation or after the design of the famous fairy grounds of the Persian monarchs, should, at the same time also, have adopted the name. It is precisely the way we have obtained the word boulevard. The word had evidently found its way also into the Greek at a very early period, for Xeno- phon, the historian and philosopher (born 445 B. C.) uses the word apparently as one which is already firmly established in the language. From the Greek word TrapaSeiaoi we have our word Paradise. But what ground is there to believe that the * In the English version, in Eccl. ii, 5, and Song of Solomon iv, 13, OI^B (pordei) is rendered bj "orchard," and in Neh. ii, 8, hj "forest.' The word, however, denotes an ornamental garden or park planted with ornamental trees and exotics, which would include choice fruit trees, sncn as the pomegranate, the lemon, and orange treea, &o. HISTORY OP HEBREW LITERATURE. 141 word is a foreign word ? Surely there is nothing in the form of the word to mark it as such ; and though we may not be able to trace its derivation to any existing Hebrew root, the same is the case with many other Hebrew words, the roots of which having become obsolete. But whether the word is a proper Hebrew one or not, it does in no way affect the Solo- monic authorship. " The word fi^JnS (pithgam), decree or sentence, occurs only in the Hebrew writings in Eccl. viii. 11, and Esth. i. 20, but is much used in all the East, hence very often met with in the Chaldee and Syriac writings. It is generally supposed to be merely a modified form of the Persian word paygham, a mes- sage or report; hence, in the Chaldee and Syriac, it is often used in the sense of a letter or epistle. In these two languages the word is of such ccmmon use, that I doubt very much its Persian origin, to say nothing of its altered form. We can readily understand that Solomon, by his constant intercourse with foreign ambassadors and frequent correspondence with other courts, would become familiar with foreign terms. In Eccl. viii. 2, the word is employed as a law term. " Because sentence against the work of the wicked is not quickly exe- cuted, therefore the hearts of the children of men is full within them to do evil," Now, it is a common practice among all nations to employ for convenience foreign expressions for law terms, and it is therefore quite probable that the word ttJflB (pithgam,) in the above passage was adopted as such from the Chaldeans. The word n3''n)a (medinah) a province, a region, which occurs in Eccl. ii. 8, is also brought forward as a proof of the late origin of the book. If, however, asked what constitutes the proof, the only reply that could be given is, that the word occurs in Esther, Daniel, Ezra, and Nehemiah, and, therefore, Ecclesiastes must be contemporaneous with these books. But this proves nothing more than that it was more commonly used by the later than the earlier writers, it does not prove a later origin. For my part, I have not the slightest doubt on my mind but that the word is originally Hebrew, and that it passed from the Hebrew into the Chaldee and Syriac. It is Hebrew in form as well as in derivation, this will be admitted by all who are capable of expressing an opinion. Every care- ful reader of the Old Testament in the original must have dis- covered that there are many words which occur only once, twke, or three times ; it would, however, be arbitrary to con- dude from this that they were not commonly used when the language was still spoken, or that those words did not occur in Hebrew writings, which, unfortunately, have been lost. Thus, for example, the word y)2X6 {themets), a whisper or pass- hi mM ,„, ^,^ 142 BISTORT OF HEBREW UTERATURE. Is" ing sound, occurs only in Job iv, 12 ; xxvi, 4, and is not met with in any writing again until it makes its appearance after a lapse of many centuries in the Talmud. This conclusively shows that the word still existed in the language during aU this long interval, and no doubt was employed in ordinary conversation, and very probably also in the extinct Hebrew writing. Again, the verb ^^5 (ffud) to jn^eas upon any one, to invade occurs in Qen. xlix. 19, and is not met with again until we come to Habakkuk, whore it occurs in ch. iii. 15. Now, will it be said that the verb fell in entire disuse after the patriarch Jacob had employed it, and that the prophet Habakkuk, about 1300 years afterwards (according to Hale's chronological table), again called it into existence ? Such a supposition would be simply absurd. Far more reasonable is it to consider the verb to have held its place in the language, and that other sacred writers in other places merely used uie synonymous verb ^*yy (gadad) to press upon, instead of it, though in ordinaiy conversation, or writings now extinct, the former verb may have been commonly employed. Many more similar examples might be adduced, but the two are sufficient to illustrate that a word occurring only onoe or a few times in the Old Testament is no proof of its not having been in com- mon use. Some of the arguments brought forward by modern critics against the genuineness of some of the books of the Old Tes- tament seem, at first sight, to all appearance, very plausible and consistent ; but when they are more carefully looked into their shallowness, if not inconsistency, becomes at once appa- rent. We have an instance of this in one of the arguments brought forward in favour of the late origin of the Book of Ecciesiastes. It ia argued, inasmuch as the word HD'^l^a (niedi- nah), a province, occurs only in Ecciesiastes and in the later books, Esther, Daniel, &c., therefore the former must be con- temporaneous with the later books. We take it for granted that our adverse critics do not mean this as an exceptional rule of criticism, merely to hold good in this case. We will therefore apply the same rule to the two Hebrew words which we have above adduced, and the result will be found to be somewhat ludicrous. The word vy^tf) (ffhemeta), a whisper, occurs only in Job and the Talmud, therefore the origin of the Book of Job must be referred to the time when that great Rabbinic work, the Talmud, was produced, that is, somewhere between 365 and 427 A. D. We may next apply the same rule to the other word, the verb m^ igud)f to press upon, is only used by the patriarch Jacob and the prophet Habakkuk, therefore, either J»icob must have been contemporaneous with Habakkuk, or Habakkuk ¥rith Jacob. HISTORY OF HEBREW LITERATURE. 143 From the foreeoing brief remarks it will be seen that the few foreign words in Ecclesiastcs place no obstacles in the way to ascribing the authorship of the book to Solomon ; and even if the nunujer were greater than they really are, the obstacle would not be insurmountable. Some of my readers will probably find these philological discussions not very interesting ; but as the character of the language in the book is brought forward as the chief argument against the Solomonic authorship, it was impoasible to pass it by unnoticed. It will be readily admitted that the space and time devoted to the defence of the authorship of a Biblical book is well spent. Some, too, may probably regard it as presumtuous on my part to endeavour to vindicate the Solomonic authorship against such an array of both orthodox and heterodox writers who maintained the contrary. It is, however, not because I by any means underrate their scholarship, or lightly esteem their opinions, but rather from a firm belief that the internal evi- dence of the book in favour of the Solomonic authorahip far outweighs the arguments that are advanced against it. And in this belief I am not only sustained by all Patristic and most Rabbinic writers, but also by many eminent modem critics and men of great learning, as Deveux, Carpzov, Mendlessohn, Van der Palm, Preston, H. A. Hahn, J. D. Michaelis, F. DeRouge- ment, Welte, Schelling, Dr. Graves, Prof. Taylor Lewis, of Schenectady, and a host of others. Clovlus a^ssures us that the true reason why Grotius would not allow Solomon to be the author of it is, that it speaks too clearly and precisely for his time of the universal judgment, and eternal life ; but these are truths established before Solomon, in the Pentateuch, Job, and Psalma And Mr. Holden observes : " It would be injudicious, it would be dangerous, it would be irreligious, to desert this combined testimony, (that Solomon wrote the book,) for bold, ingenius conjecture. According to the opinion of some of the ancient Kabbinic writers, the Song of Solomon was written whilst the king was yet in the full enjoyment of youth ; the Book of Provei-bs, in more advanced years ; and the book of Ecclesiastes in his old age, at the close of his magnificent career, after he had been brought to repentance for his awful apostacy from God. Whether this opinion is correct as regards all these works or not, certain it is that the Book of Ecclesiastes was written at the very close of his life, when the splendour of his court, the accumulated wealth, and favourte pursuits, in fact everything which once afforded enjoyment, possessed no longer any charm for him. It is distinctly stated, 1 Kings, xi. 4, that it was " when Solomon was old that his wives turned away his heart 144 HISTORY OF HEBREW LITERATURE. ]■: after other gods :" and it was only after he had heartily repented of tnis apostacy from God that he could have given expression to a sentiment so pregnant with piety as that con- tained in the two last verses of the book. As the teaching of the Book of Ecclesiastes enters the domain of philosophy, it is not only difficult to translate, but some portions are also difficult to explain. Hence some writers have erroneously interpreted passages as savouring of irreligion, and others as savouiing of immorality. But, when those passages are rightly interpreted, they will be found not to express the sentiments of Solomon, but the false opinions of others, whom he personatt-s in order that he m^.y confute them. The two last verges form a complete answer to such frivolous charges. Mr. Holden, in his " Attempt to illustrate the Book of Eccle- siastes," has divided tlie book into two principal parts. The first, which extends to the tenth verse of the sixth chapter, be considers as taken up in demonstrating the vanitj' oFall earthly conditions, occupations, and pleasures ; and the second part, which includes the remainder of the book, as occupied in eulo- gizingWJSDOM, and describing its nature, its excellence, and its beneticial effects. — {Preliminary JUiocourse, p. 65.) ;') 'S IV; THE SONG OF SOLOMON. T'he Song of Solomon is, in Hebrew, A'^ery appropriately entitled t]"'"^""!!!Jn T-VS (shir h(ish-shirim) literally, Tke Song of ,'litH of the cloiuls ; I will make iiijHflf like the Most High." (ch. xiv. 14.) lie disinterred among the slain, cast away like " an abominnlilu branch." " All the kings of the nations, all of them, Lie in glory every one, in his own sepulchre,* But thou art cast out of thy grave, like an abominable branch ; Clothed (i. e., covered) with the slain, irit/i, the i)ierced by the sword. With those going down to the stones of the pit ; as a carcase trampled under foot. (vv. 18, 19.) I think it was Hafiz, the Persian poet, and greatest poetical genius of any age, wd»o said, " The life of man is a journal in which he shoidd write only good actions." Belshazznr, tliu last king of Babylon, seems to have reversed the sublime say- ing of the poet, and filled his "journal" with nothing but evil deeds. Xenophon mentions an instance of this king's wanton cruelty in killing the .'•on of Gobrias, for no other provocation than that in hunting he hit a boar and lion which the kinj; had missed. — (Cycrop 4, 6, sec. 3.) The same writer speaks of IM- shazzar as the ai^oo-to? ^ao-tXey?, the wicked king. It is, there- fore, highly probable, although Cyrus, as Xenophon distinctly states, gave permission for the burying of the dead, the body of this impious tyrant, who, as the prophet declares, — " Made the world a wilderness, and destroyed its cities ;" — (v. 17.) " Because thy country thou hast destroyed, thy people thou hast slain ;" — (v. 20.) was left lying as a despised thing, being detested by his own people. This supposition is strengthened by the circumstance that nowhere is thei'e any mention made of the king's burial. Well lias the poet said, regarding Belshazzar, " Tom from the feast of music, wine, and mirth, The worm thy covering, and thy couch the earth. Thy chieftains pause, they turn thy relics o'er, Then pass thee by, for thou art no more." * In the original it is, "in his house;" ancient sepulclires from their often being of great size, and frequently divided into compartments, are often spoken of a? u liouse, hence in Eccl. xii. 6, called DjI^TI ITI^S (ft'^'^'iao^ftm) the long home, and Is. xxii.lfi, "ISIDT^ i^ishcaii); "a dwelling." "Buc thou art cast out," t. e., thou are depriveil, for the king had not been buried; "like an abonniiable branch," has no doubt refeience, to the tree or brancii of the tree on whicb malefactors were hanged, (see Deut. xxi. 22, 23. The ancient Jews regarded those trees us abominable and .accursed. The expression, "to the stones of the pit," merely means, to the sepulchre made of stones- * it HISTORY OF IIKBREW LITERATURE. 155 E(iually Huliliiiio and explicit are the (liH'frcnt pioi)h('tic ilcchtrntioiis rcnfirdin^' the Ixipi'V mi'l fj^lorioiis t'\'i'iir of the coiiiiii;^^ of the Messijili. J low hejiiitilully and vividly, for fxaiiiple, does the prophet poitray the universal peace that is to eliaracteri^c^ the iMessiuh's rei^n. The liercest animals of till" forest shiill not oidy no lon<;'er destroy, )»ut even lie down pt-aceahly heside those animals uj)(»n whicli they formerly |ireyed. The most venomous seipents shall heeome perfectly liarmless, so that the suckin;.;' eliild may play on the hole of the asp, and weaned child lay his hand up(m the den of the cei'astes. " Tlien slinll the wolf (l«cll with tlie Iamb ; And tlie leoimr.l lie down with the kid ; And tlie call and yiniti^' linn mid fialiiig are together; And a little cliiUI HJiall lead tlu-in. And tlie yimiif,' onwaiid licar shall feed together J Tot;ctlier tdiall their jciung ones lie down ; And the lion Hliall eat straw like the ox. And the snekiiig eliild shall play upon the hole of the asp ; And the weaned ehild siiiill lay 'lis hand on the den of the cerastes. They shall not hurt, imr destroy in all the holy moiiiitain ; For the earth is full of the knowledge of Jehovah, Like the waters covering the sea." (Isa. xi. 6, 7, 8, 9.) The peace, harmony, and ha[)piness, which existed in Para- dise, hefore sin had entered the world, shall again be restored, only in a far higher degree. feome of the most ennnent classic and oriental poets have, in a similar manner, depicted the renewal of the Gulden, Age, l)y wild animals growing tame, })oisonous serpents and herbs becoming harmless, but it is universally admitted, even by sceptics, that not in a .single instance does the delineation bear any comparison t(i the force and exc^uisite imagery of Isaiah. The closer we .scrutinize the passage, the more become the force and beauty of the language employed apparent. The wolf's appetite for animal food is most vehement, and nature has furnished him with strengtli, cuiming and agility. He will especially attack such aninials as are not able to resist hivn, and which he can easily carry away ; hence he is the natural enemy to the lamb. But in the above passage he is represented as a friendly visitor or as the guest of the lamb, fur the verb ^t{^ iijur,) liere emi)loyed, denotes merely to divell for (I time, to "sojourn, as a stranger or guest. Thus the pa.s.sage beautifully expresses the idea that the former deadly animosity has been changed into an intimate fi-iendship. The "leopard" is, in Hebrew, called "-1)33 (navier.) i.e., the spotted animal. The Hebrew term, however, includes also the panther, and most likely even the tiger, which is, by the Ara- bians, called al nimer, and was in former times ^'ery plentiful in Palestine. The Arabs are still in the habit of kindling a :4, ; m ii , m IMAGE EVALUATION TEST TARGET (MT-3) // ^ 4^ 1.0 I.I 1.25 1^ m 12.5 |jo ■^" ■■H 2.0 ^ IllliJi^ ''^ > ^^ <9 / Hiotographic Sciences Corporation 33 WEST MAIN STREET WEBSTER, N.Y. 145S0 (716) 872-4503 ^ '%'■ ^ 1^ & '^ '\^I^ V .% ^(^ 166 filSTORt OP HKBREW LlTERAtUfte. fire around their tents to keep off the tigers. " Shall lie down." Here again the prophet has very beautifully chosen the verb V3") (ravats) which denotes to recline, or lie down in peace and contentment. The psalmist employed the same verb when he said: " In pastures of tender grass he caused me to lie down." — (Ps. xxiii. 2.) And Zophar, addressing Job, also uses the same verb : " And^'thou shalt lie down, and none shall make thee afraid." — (Job xi. 19.) Isaiah, in using this verb, here indicates that the leopard shall now lie down in tranquil repose with the kid, not as formerly crouching down, lurking for his prey. If the Hebrew student will turn to Ps. x. 9, 10, where the wicked man is spoken of as lurking for his prey like a lion, he will find that other verbs are employed in the original. " The calf and young lion are together." The lion whilst young and active delights to live in the forest far away from human habitation, his strength and agility enables him to pro- cure sufficient food in his forest retreat. It is only when growing old that he boldly comes near habitations where fiocks are kept. In the peaceful reign of the Messiah the young lion will no longer be tne terror of the denizens of the forest, but be the peaceful companion of the calf and fatling. The lion eating straw like the ox indicates an entire change of the habits of the lion. He will become in every respect like a domestic animal. In verse 8 the figure is changed from the most voracious animals to the most poisonous serpents, in order still more fully to depict the peaceful state that was to be ushered in by the advent of the coming Messiah. " The asp" is a very poisonous serpent, and very common in Arabia, in Cyprus, and in Egj'pt, and often appears in hiero- gl3rphic and other sculptures, as one of the sacred animals of Egypt. The poison of the asp is very acute and speedy in its effect. The asp is sometimes from three to five feet long. The ''515B2L (tsiphoni,) is either the basaliak or cerastes, in Latin called sihilus, the hisser. Both are exceedingly venomous: indeed, the prophet could not possibly have selected more deadly serpents. " They shall not hurt nor destroy in all my holy mountain, i. «., there shall no longer be any hurting or destroying, but there will be an entire change, all wickedness shall be done away with, henceforth peace shall reign universal. And why ? Because the earth is full with the knowledge of Jehovah (lit with a knowing Jehovah,) as the waters covering the sea;" (lit. as the waters are a covering to the sea, i. e., to the bottom of the sea.) Many commentators apply the verbs, "they shall not hurt nor destroy," to the animals mentioned in the preced- I 1 1 J . . 4 -.4 j HISTORY OF HEBREW LITERATURE. 157 3 down." ,he verb eace and when he lown." — the same lake thee indicates 086 with his prey, ^here the a lion, he il. m whilst way from m to pro- mly when lere flocks ^oung lion forest, but ire change espect like voracious more fully in by the ommon in in hiero- inimals of speedy in long. "The in Latin irenomous : cted more mountain, oying, but ing verses, but it would hardly be suitable to speak of animals destroying in the " holy mountain." The verbs undoubtedly refer to men in general. It is quite a common thing in Hebrew fin" verba being constructed imperaoncUly to denote the perfoi'm- ance of an action by tome person or persons, without stating by whom. Thus, for example, 1 Sam. xviii. 20 : " And Michal, Saul's daughter, loved David : and they told Saul," i. e. Saul was told. Besides, an allusion to meri is absolutely necessary to make the descriptio < of an entire change complete ; for without a complete change of the wicked nature of men like that of the animals the establishment of a universal peace would be impossible. On referring to the Hebrew Bible it will be seen, too, that all the verses from the beginning of the chapter to verse 8 inclvmve, are connected by the conjunctive (^ wav) and ; but verse 9 is not so connected, which shows that it is not a direct continuation of what precedes, but rather a summary. Indeed ▼erse 9 is the only one in the whole chapter which does not commence with the conjunctive (^ wav) and. It is worthy of notice, too, that i" the first clause the pro- phet uses the future, " they shall ..oi \"'v, they shall not destroy;" but in the second clause he empl j the vreteHte, " for the earth ia full," which indicates that the earth n^ust be filled with the knowledge of Jehovah before the universal peace can be ushered in. The sanctified, happy, and peaceful state of Messiah's reign is often spoken of in Scripture. The reader may compare, for instance, Isa. iv. 2, 3 ; liv. 13, 14 ; lix. 20, 21 : Jer. xxxi. 33, 34 : Ezek. xxxvi. 25, &c., and in other places. The book of Isaiah has fared no better at the hands of some of our modem critics than most of the books of the Hebrew Scriptures. And this is by nc means to be wondered at, for writers who deny to the Almighty the power of suspending the laws of nature, will hardly stop short of denying Him also the power of bestowing the gift of prophecy. For, from a human point of view, the latter is no less wonderful than the former, and without supernatural power, utterly impossible. Now it is precisely upon the supposition that there cnnnot he a distinct prophetic foresight of events lying still in the womb of the distant future, that the neological interpreters have founded their argument against the authenticity of a great portion oi the Book of Isaiah. I say a great portion, for our critics are here unusually generous, and allow that Isaiah has written some portions of the earlier prophecies contained in the first thirty-nine chapters ; but as to the whole of the later pro- phecies contained in the last twenty-seven chapters, they insist upon their having been written at a later age. It would only ^-! "11 158 HiSTQRT OF HEBREW LITERATURE. be reasonable to suppose that in such a serious matter aa the calling in question the authenticity of a large portion of the book of Isaiah, our modern writers would ha^^e some tangible ground upon which they could safely base their condiuiong. That no such solid basis exists is self-evident from the conflict- ing opinions prevailing among themselves as to the portions that are of Isaian origin, and those that are the product of a later period. Wo might fill pages with conjectures that have been advanced by various writers of the rationalistic school ; but one or two examples will be quite sufficient to give the reader an idea how they are floundering about in " the slough" of uncer- tainty. Thus Koppe regards ch. xii. to be a hymn of much later origin. This view Gesenius controverts ; but is again espoused by Ewald, and rejected again by Urabreit. It is altogether inconceivable that such eminent scholars as Ewald and Koppe should adopt such a reckless mode of criticism. The eleventh chapter is allowed to be authentic, but chapter xii, which is so closely connected with the preceding chapter, that both might have been appropriately united into one, is held to be an addition made after the Babylonish exile. The prophet, after having in the last part of the preceding chapter pro- phecied the destruction of Israel's enemies, and that all obsta- cles to the restoration of Qod's people should be removecl, beautifully concludes his grand prophetic declaration by put- ting in the mouth of those delivered a short song of praise of six verses, which is contained in chapter xii. This song com- mences with the words : " And thou shalt say in that day," •*. «., in the day when the foregoing prophecy is accomplished, which clearly shows that the song is a mere continuation of the preceding chapter, though it forms now a separate chapter. Once more, chapter xxiv. was, according to Hitzig, written in Assyria, by one of the captives of Israel. Qesenius a^crihee it to some one who lived during the Babylonian exile, not Ions before the fall of Babyloa. Eichhorn refers the composition m the chapter after the destruction of Babylon. Rosen miiller in the first edition of his " Scholia," maintained the .same view ; butin the second edition he allows that Isaiah is the author of it; Ewald considers the chapter to have been written in Palestine, but after the restoration of the Jews. The reader will now see upon whe.t shifting sand the opinions of the neolo^ical writers are bassd. Surely, if modem criticism cannot furnish something more substantial, it is hish time that it should be altogether abandoned But whilst the rationalistic writers differ in the^ opinion in regard to tii6 authenticity oi the different portions of the book of Isaiab, HI8T0BY OF HSBBEW LITEBATURE. 159 «ad the time and place of composition, the^ are perfectly unanimous in denying the possibility of " a distinct prophetic foresight of events in the distant future" Fortunately there are a few chapters — in these days of severe criticism wo nave to be thankful for small things — the authen- ticty of which, we believe, have never been called in question ; itnd we have thus an opportunity afforded us of examining the Bonndness of the opinion, that there cannot he a distinct fore- tight of distant events. Chapter xvii. is one of those that escaped the pruning knife. It commences with a prophecy of the destruction of Damascus and Ephraim : " The bnrden of DAmaaous. Bthold, DftmMcui it remoTed from bting a eilp. It iluJl be ft minons heftp." (v. 1.) The reader will bear in mind that the authenticity of this chapter has never been questioned. It is, therefore, acknowl- edged that Isaiah actually foretold the destruction of Damascus. Now, has this prrtphecy been fulfilled ? For an answer let us turn to ch. viii. 4 : I- ". , , ■ • - 1 _ .■<<-,■-■•■ •■,;,' " For before the child thftll know >: -.ti. ./: To call my father and my mother, ^ui< The wealth of Damascus shall be carried away, And the spoil of Samaria, before the king of Assyria." '-"V (t. e. into his presence.) , , . 'u*''i( The time when the destruction of Damascus was to take E lace, was, according to this verse, before the little child of uiah called Maher-shalel-hash-baz* was able to pronounce the name " my father and my mother." If we now turn to ch. x. 9, we find Damascus already spoken of as having been captured. " /« not Oalno as Ci^'.-chemish ? Or w not Hami^tn like Arpad 1 ; i' > - ' Or is not Samaria like Damascus ?" Here the Assyrian king boasts of his exploits, as much as to say, have I not conquered all these places ? The prophet Araos also foretold the destruction of Damascus. — (Ch. 1. 3, 4, 5.) This prophecy was fulfilled under Tiglath-Pileser, king of Assyria, as follows: Rezin, king of Syria, had formed an alliance with Pekah, king of Israel. The latter had been an efficer in the army of Pekahiah, king of Israel, he conspired against his master, murdered him, and arrogated the crown to himself. — (2 Kings, xv. 25.) This alliance took place dur- ing the reign of Jotham, king of Judah, but the invasion of • Mfther-shftlel-haah-bas, a symbolical name, signifying ha$ten hetpoil, haiteH the 4oo(y, indicating the swift falftUment of the prophecy. m 160 BISTORT OF HEBREW LITEBATDRE. Judah did not take place until after his death, when hit» aon Ahaz succeeded him. In the fi ret year of Ahaz they besieged Jerusalem, but not being able f o take it, they wasted the coun- try around, and then withdreiv. The next year they returoeu again, and after having entirely destroyed the army of Ahaz, and carried away a great multitude of the people as captives to Damascus, (2 Ohron. xxviii. 5), they separated their troops. After this, Ahaz, finding that he was not able to withstand the combined armies of Rezin and Pekah, applied for rissistance to Tiglath-Pileser, to whom he paid a large sum of money. Tiglath-Pileser marched against Damascus, took the city, slew Rezin, and carried a great many of its inhabitants captive to Kir. — (2 Kings, xvi. 9.) The scriptural account of the taking of Damascus is con- firmed by one of the inscriptions in Layard's " Inscriptions in cuniform characters from Assyrian monuments," London, 1851. The inscription, unfortunately, is greatly obliterated, but there is still enough sufficiently plain, to make known that Tiglath-Pilesei, by means of an expedition which lasted two years, destroyed the kingdom of Damascus, led many of the in- habitants captive, and devastated many cities from the districts Damascus like a heap of rubbish., Isaiah, in the prophecy against Damascus, does not, as in his prophecy against Babylon, declare that it should never be rebuilt again ; it merely declares that the then existing city should be destroyed. The expression: "Behold Damascus is removed from being a city," may, however, carry with it the accessory meaning, that it should from henceforth cease to be the capital city of a kingdom, which was truly the case. Damascus was afterwards rebuilt again, but again destroyed by Nebuchadnezzar. It was soon rebuilt again, and though it passed through severe vicissitudes from time to time,notably the fearful massacre of July 9th, 1860, it is still a great city con- taining about 140,000 inhabitants, of whom about 12,000 are Jews, and 12,000 are Christians. We have now seen that the prophecy in ch. xvii. 1, against Damascus, the genuineness of which has been admitted by our adverse critics, has been literally fulfilled; and, indeed, we might adduce other prophecies which are likewise allowed to have been written by Isaiah, and have also been consummated. Upon what reasonable ground then, I would ask, can it be maintained that the prophecies regarding events at a more remote future must have been written nearer, or at the time of their accomplishment ? Will it be asserted that it is easier to foretell a nearer event than one more remote ? I positively maintain that such is not the case, for both involve an impos- siblity without supernatural aid. Let us, as an illustration, HISTOBT OF HEBREW LITERATUBE. 161 take the fearful disaster that took place a short time ago. Would it have been easier to foretell in detail, on the first of January, that the next morning a train would leave Toronto, and that before it got to its destination, a few miles out of the city, it would be met by a train coming from the oppo9ite direction, and that a collision would be the result, by which twenty-eight persons would lose their lives, and others be fearfully mutilated, than foretell a collision that will take place somewhere a hun- dred years hence ? It will at once be acceded that one involves as much an impossibility as the other, for neither could be foretold without the Divine gift of prophecy. There is no assigning a limit either to a miracle or prophetic vision, for both Are the manifestation of the power of God ; to do so would be setting a bound to the omnipotence of the Almighty. Our modem critics in order, therefore, to be consistent, should either have maintained the authenticity of all the prophecieM contained in the book, or have rejected them all as spurious. Consistency, however, as we have already had occasion to show, is not one of the characteristics of the new school of criticism. Our critics lay great stress upon the naming of " Cyrus," in ch. xliv. 28, and ch. xlvi. 1, as proving the later origin of the laMt twenty-seven chapters ; and no doubt their objection to the name of a person being mentioned upwards of a century before he was bom, may have staggered many. But this is not the only instance in Scripture where the name of a person yet unborn is mentioned who was destined to per- form a special service. In 1 Kings, xiii. 2, we read : " And he cried, (i. e., Shemaiah the prophet,) " against the altar in the word of the Lord, and said, 0 altar, altar, thus saith the Lord ; Behold, a child *shall be born unto the house of David, Josiah, by name, and upon thee shall he offer the priests of the high places that bum incense upon thee, and men's bones shall be burned upon thee." For the fulfilment of this prophecy, compare 2 Kings xxiii. 16, 19. But the signifi- cance of the mentioning of the name of Cj^us in connection with the prophecies with which it occurs, becomes strikingly apparent in the fulfilment of these prophecies. Cyrus was not only to become the instrument in the hand of God to destroy the Babylonian power, but likewise to become the friend of the oppressed Israelites, by permitting them to return home from their captivity, to direct the rebuilding of Jerusalem, with the temple, and re;;:t-ore again the holy vessels which had been *Ittiheorigiiuditia ^blD ("o^'x') "iaborn," The prophets, in their prophetic dc^ustioni frequently emplOT the pretetU ten$e for the future. In their prophetic *iiion they lee the erenta m it they were paeuns before their eyes, and hence often *Pwk of them m hkring already taken place, indicating thereby the certainty of the fnlfllment 0" 162 BISTORT OF HEBREW LITERATUBE. deposited in the Babylonish temples. Now Josephwi, in his Antiquities, lib. xl., en. 1. sees. 1, 2, 3, informs ua that the Jews in Baoylon had shown to Cyrus the passage from the prophecy of Isaiah where his name is mentioned, and that he was so struck with the Divine record that he was induced to issue his decree, recorded in Ezra i. 2, 3, 4 : " Thus saith Cyrus, king of Persia, the Lord Qod of heaven hath given me all the kug- doms of the earth ; and he hath charged me to build him an house at Jerusalem, which is in Judah," kc. In this edict Ovrus actually incorporated many words employed by Isaiah, Thus Isa. xlv. 3, 4, reads : 8. " And I w'" gire to thee the treMures of durkneM^ And hidden riohee of eeoret plaoee, That thon m»yeat know that I, Jehorah, That ia etiliag tlue by thy name, Am the Qod of Israel. 4. " For the take of my lerrant Jaoob ; And Israel nj chosen : I hare called thee by thy name ; I liaTe sumamed thee, thouKh thou didst not know me." i'i Cyrus, in his decree in verse 1, also uses the sacred name^ mn*' {J^ehovah), and ^nbs* {Elohe) "God of;" and in verse 3 he employs bKlW TlblS^ {Elohe Tiarael), "Qod of Israel,'^ the same as Isaiah did. Here again heathen writers bear testimony to the fulfilment of the prophecy contained in the first port of verse 3. Sardes (or Sardis, the capital of Lydia,) andfBabylon were at the time when captured by Cyrus, the two wealthiest in the world. Crcrsus, the last Lydian king, so renowned for his riches, sur- rendered his treasures to Cyrus, accompanied with an exact amount in writing of the whole, stating the particulars with which each waggon was loaded when they were carried away, and were delivered to Cyrus at the Palace of Babylon. (Xenoph. Cyrop. lib. vii. pp. 503, 515, 540.) According to rliny the wealth taken by Cyrus in Asia, in gold and silver alone, if reduced to our money, would amount to $631,220,000 : (Nat. Hist, xxxiii. 15.) The expression in verse 4 : " I have sumamed thee," refers to the titles which God bestowed upon him in ch. xliv., 28 " Shep- herd," and in ch. xlv. 1, " Anointed." Now, unless Cyrus had seen his own name in the prophecies of Isaiah, how could he have known that the prophecies referred to him ? But we can readily understand, that, pagan as he was, he could not fail to recognize in cho^e prophecies a power not possessed by his gods, that could foretell with such precision upwards of a century before his birth, not only his name, but likewise the great conquests he was to make, and the great 9I8T0RT OF HEBBEW LITEIUTUAI. wealth which would fall into his possession. In a similar manner Pharaoh acknowledged that Joseph possessed " the spirit of Ood," since he was able to interpret his dream. Nebu- ^adnezzar, too, after Daniel had interpreted his dream, exclaimed, " Of a truth it is that your Ood is a God of gods." From the foregoing remarks the reader will see the signifi- cnnce of the name of Cyrus appearing in these prophecies, and aofar from its arguing against their authenticity, as our modern critics insist upon, to my mind, it is a strong proof of their ffenoineness, as no impostor would ever have dreamed of speak- ing of a person by name not yet liorn. But we may well ask, if Isaiah is not the author of the whole book, by whom were the spurious portions written ? It certainly could not have been an Israelite who perpetrated such an atrocious fraud of passing off spurious prophecies as genuine ones of the prophet Isaiah. Josephus reniarkH, " for during so many ages as have already passed, no one has been so bold as either to add any thing to them, or take anything from them, or to make any ehange in them ; but it becomes natural to all Jews, immedi- ately and from their birth, to esteem those books to contain Divine doctrines, and to persist in them, and if occasion bt willingly die for them." (Josephus against Apion. fiook 1, | 787.) But let us for a moment admit the possibility that these jwophecies might have been writtenby .some sacrilegious persoiiH at a much later period, then the next question which demands a satisfactory answer is, how did those spurious proi)hecieH find their way among the acknowledged sacred writings ? Our modern critics have not so much as ventured a conjecture on this point, much less propounded a reasonable explanation of it. We shall hereafter show the existence of schooLs and semi- naries among the ancient Jews, in which the study of the sacred Scriptures wero made the basis of all secular learning. This, at least, w&s the case until Orecian philosophy began to exercise its influence upon the Hebrew mind at a much later date. How then, was it possible for such a large amount of spurious writing to be passed off as genuine, containing pro- phecies not only appertaining to the immediate condition and welfare of the whole nation, but also to the coming of the Messiah? Such prophecies, and especially those referring to the Messiah, would naturally receive a great deal of attention in interpreting them both to the young and old. It involves simply an impossibility, that the learned of the nation should have accepted spurious prophecies as genuine. Some of our modem critics indeed labour, by free transla- tions and forced interpretations, to explain awaythe Messianic prophecies, but it is quite certain that no such attempt was ^il ;l:i ■in: ; I t ■ j !4 -I 164 UI8TORT OF HEBREW LITERATURE. made by the ancient Jews. We need only appeal, aa evidence, to Isa. xlii, 1 : " Behold my servant nhall aeal prudently." Now M the term fn^J (avdi) " my servant," is sometimes applied to Job, Mottes, Joshua, and David ; hence Jonathan, in his Targum (Chaldee version, executed about the Christian era,) renders it »n^tD?a ''115 {avdi meahicha), " my servant the Messiah," adding the explanatory term, " Messiah," to prevent any misapplication. It is evident that Jonathan, of whom the Talmud speaks as being " the greatest of all the eighty disci- ples of Hillel," regarded these later prophecies of Isaiah as genuine. (Compare also the Targum on xlii, 13, liii, 11.) Our modern critics, refer the composition of the last twenty-seven chapters of Isaiah to the period of exile when, as they main- tain, the conquests by Cyrus and the deliverance of the Israel- ites from their captivity, might easily be foreseen without any direct revelation. It is, therefore, admitted that those chapters were in existence at the time of Ezra and Nehemiah.how then is it to be reconciled that these inspired men should have given them a place as a portion of the canonical Scripture if they had been spurious ? This argument, however, will probably not weigh very much with our rationalistic writers, since their views regarding inspiration are as vague as their views res- pecting miracles and the gift of prophecy ; we will, therefore, adopt a pet argument of tneir own, the force of which, if there is any consistency in modem criticism, they will not be able to gainsay. We have seen in our remarks on Ecclesiastes, that our modern critics lay special stress in their endeavour to estab- lish its later origin on the existence of Aramaisms in the book, now how does it happen if the last twenty-seven chapters of Isaiah have been written as late as the Baoylonian exile, that they are so free of Aramaisms? Not even the fragment •gj {ahe) of the relative pronoun "i^UK {cisher) which, so fre- quently pointed to by our modem critics in other portions of the Scripture as indicative of a later origin, is to be met with in the whole book of Isaiah. They will, therefore, have to admit, either that the occurrence of Aramaisms after all fur- nish no positive test of the later origin of a writing, or that the whole book of Isaiah belongs to the golden age of Hebrew literature. Then again, if indeed, as it is maintained the last twenty- seven chapters of the book have been written by a different person, how is the uniformity of style that pervades the whole book to be accounted for 7 So marked in this, that even the most pronounced rationalistic writers had to acknowledge it Thus, Knobel says : " The author writes, like Isaiah, very enthusiastically, fervently and lively." Umbreit speaks of the HISTORY OF HEBREW LITERATURE. IM author of chapters xl. to Ixvi. as " Isaiah risen again in a new body of the spirit" Indeed eveir unprejudiced person reading Isaiah in the original must admit that but one style, one grandeur of diction pervades the whole book from beginning to end. But there remains still another question which demands a satisfactory answer, namely, if chapters xl. to Ixvi. belong to a later period, as our modern writers will have it, how came they to be connected with the prophecies of Isaiah ? Would they not rather have appeared in a separate form like the respective books of the minor prophets with the name of the autnor in the first verse ? Obadian containH only one chapter, Haggai, two chapters, Habakkuk, three chapters, Zephaniah, three chapters, and none contain more than fourteen chapters, yet are mven as separate books, with the name of the respec- tive author in the first verso. Why then should the twenty- seven chapters not have been treated in a similar manner? Our critics have never attempted to reconcile this difiiculty. The simple fact is, the modern school of criticism have espoused the doctrine, that the foretelling of distant events involves an impossibility, and in order to bring Scripture in harmony with tnis doctrine, it has recourse to the most reckless criticism, evidently caring very little what the result may be. I said, reckless criticism ; well, can anyone imagine anything more so, than the writers of this school have displayed in their endeavour to strip a great portion of Isaiah of its authenticity, in order to get rid of the prophecies contained in it ? We are to believe that the last twenty-seven chapters of the book of Isaiah have been written by some unknown person sometime during the Babylonian captivity, and that some equally unknown person — we suppose in order to make them appear as prophecies of Isaiah — quietly without any person knowing or discovering it, added these chapters to the prophecies of Isaiah which had been written upwards of a century before. Now is it possible that such a sacrilege could have been perpetrated without its being discovered by the teachers and learned men of the nation ? The genuineness of any portion of the book of Isaiah has never oeen called into question, until the latter part of the eighteenth century, either by any Jewish or Christian writer. It was Koppe, who in his German translation of Lowth's Isaiah, published in 1781, first mooted that Isaiah was not the author of the last twenty-seven chapters. Not long afterwards Doderlein promulgated the same view in his Latm translation and commentary m 1789. Early in the nineteenth century the distinguished scholar Eichhorn, Professor of Oriental Literature in the University of Qottingen, set forth the same opinion in 2t It d 1)1 .' ■ 4 '! I i !i ;; i1 M ■:• 186 HISTOBT or HEBREW LITBRATURB. his Hebrttischen Propheten (Hebrew Prophete.) From a writer imbued with such extreme anti-supernatural views as he was, hardly anything else oould be expected. According to him, the miracles and prophecies recorded in the Scriptures may all be explained as natural events. With the teaching of Eichhom, the newer mode oforiticiem assumed a more definite form, and hia prelections to large classes, first in the University of Jona, and afterwards in the Univerity of Qottingen, would naturally tend greatly to increase the number of its adherents. Ration- alism, like an infectious disease when no efforts were made to check it, seems to have been rapid in its progress, and even such men as Berthold, Hitzig, Qesenius, Ewald, and Kuennen, have succumbed to its contagion. Their judgment, therefore, in respect to a great portion of the hook of Isaiah being of a later origin, as well as regards inspiration in general, "is deter- mined"— as Dr. Smith nas justly observed — "not by their scholarship, but by the prepossession of their unbelief." We are told that traditions and long cherished opinions have frequently been obliged to give way to new theories, and why should not the same be the case as regards Biblical subjects ? No doubt new theories have sometimes supplanted old ones ; but whenever such was the case the new theory was invariably founded upon such a solid foundation as to make it universally acceptable. It was a theory which precluded the possibility of difference of opinion being entertained respecting it. Now, is the theory of our modem critics regarding the later origin of the last thirty-seven chapters of Isaiah of such a character ? What solid foundation has it to rest upon ? None whatever. These critics can neither tell us who was the author of them, nor the place where they were written. They cannot account for how they became attached to the genuine writings of Isaiah, or by what means they found their way among the canonical books. Not upon one of these points are they agreed among themselves. Up to a few centuries ago it was generally believed that the sun moved round the earth ; now the Copernican system, which makes the sun at rest in the centre, and the earth and planets to move around it, is universally accepted, because the system is founded upon unquestionable evidence which admits of no difference of opinion. Until modem criticism can furnish in like manner unquestionable evidence against the authenticity of any portion of the Old Testament, it is, to say the least, highly unreasonable to expect us to reject time-hallowed tradi- tions, and time-hallowed opinions, for mere modern conjectures. Of the personal history of Isaiah very little is known. According to an ancient tradition Isaiah suffered martyrdom, in the early part of the reign of the wicked king Manasseh, HISTORY or HEBREW LITERATUBB. 167 who eansed him to be sawn asunder. The tradition is somewhat nonfirmed by 2 Kings xxi. 16, where it is said : " Manatiseh ■hed innocent blood very much, till he had filled Jerusalem from one end to another.' And idso by Jonephus, who states, that he barbarouHly slew the righteous men that were among the Hebrews, nor would he spare the prophets." — (Ant. b. x., oh. iii.,par. 1.) It is supposed, too, that St Paul, in his Epistle to the Hebrews, may allude to this martyrdom of Isaiah, when he says : " They were stoned, they were sawn asunder, were tempted, were slain with the sword." — (Ch. xi. 37.) To this day the visitor is sliown the spot at Jerusalem where the mar- tyrdom is said to have occurred. It is near an old mulberry tree, near the pool of Silonui. The tradition has been retained by most of the fathers of the Christian church. Qilfillan beau- tifully alludes to this tradition in his closing remarks upon Isaiah, as follows : " Cruel close to such a career ! Harsh reply, this sawing asunder, to all these sweet and noble minstrelsies. German critics have recently sought to imitate the operation ; to cut our present Isaiah in two. To halve a body is easy ; it 13 not quite so easy to divide a soul and spirit in sunder. Isaiah himsoli spurns such an attempt. The same mind is manifest in all parts of the prophecy. Two suns in one sky were as incredible as two such flaming phenomena as Isaiah, No ! It is one voice which cries out at the beginning, ' Hear, O heavens, and give ear, O earth ;' and which closes the book with the promise, ' And it shall come to pass, that from one new moon to another, and from one sabbath to another, shall all flesh come and worship before me, saith the Lord.' " — {Barda of the Bible, p. 164.) The writings of Jeremiah, Ezekiel, and the minor prophets, are all highly poetical. liii' 1 11 i i^ CHAKACTBRISTICS OF HEBREW POETRY. Much labour and ingenuity have been expended in endeav- ouring to solve the problem, as to what constitutes Hebrew poetry. According to Josephus (Antiquities b. ii., ch. iii., par. 4; b. iv., ch. viii., par. 44 ; b. vii., ch. xii., par. 3), there are to be found in some of the poetical writings of the Old Testament, both hexameter and tetrameter verses. Philo, too, asserts that Moses was acquainted with metre. Eusebius and Jerome held similar views. These positive statements, coming from such ancient sources, induced Gomarus, Qrave, and many others, to institute a search for those characteristic attributes of the Hebrew muse. But all their endeavours to discover either rhyme or metre proved unsuccessful ; and well it might, for they were in fact in search of a thing which never existed. A I \> « It I Ii 168 HISTORY OF HEBREW LITERATURE. E 1*^ writer has very justly remarked, that "The ground of differ* ence observable between the poetry of other nations and that of the Hebrews, lies in the fact that the prosodies of the former prescribe certain strict and undeviating limits, within which the poet is compelled to move in the expression of his feelings ; such as the length of the verses, the arrangement of the syfla- bles composing them according to quantity, the place of the caasura, &c., to which moderns have added the regular recur- rence of like ending." or rhymes. The Hebrew muse, on the contrary, maintaining her primitive simplicity, lays down no arbitrary laws of versification, with which to fetter the genius of the poet ; she requires of her votary neither more nor less than that he should find himself in a state of excited and exalted feeling, which is necessary to the production of ail genuine poetry, and possess the power of delineating his emo- tions w'th truth and vigour." We meet, indeed, with some few isolated passages which appear to rhyme, as Psalm Ixxii. 10 ; Isa. i. 25, 29 ; Prov. vi. 1, 2 ; Job vi. 9 ; and so in a few other places. I'hese apparent rhymes are, however, only produced accidentally, arising as it will be seen from the pronominal suffixes of the last words. Even in the witty reply of Samson, in which rhyme was prob- ably intended, the similarity of sound in the last syllable of each line is the necessary result of the pronominal suffixes • TiTn Dn&^2[?a sib . ; . • ▼ • ~ T ; ^ Lulti charashtem hteglalhi Lo metsathem chidaihi. . " If ye had not ploughed with my heifer. Ye had not found out my riddle.' (Judges, xiv. 18.) But although it is certain that neither metre nor rhyme are to be found in Hebrew poetry, the reader cannot be at a loss to distinguish readily the poetical from the prose writings. There is a certain style pervading the former which clearly shows them to be compositions altogether of a grander and more elevated order. This style, which forms the chief char- acteristic of the saci-ed poetry of the Old Testament, is paral- lelism, not inaptly called by some, " thought rhythm." An acquaintance with its structure is altogether indispensable in the interpretation of Scripture, for a want of attention to its mode of expression, must necessarily lead to misconception of many passages. Happily, it requires no knowledge of Hebrew in order to gain an acquaintance with its structure. A few remarks will suffice to put the reader in possession with at least the most important information on the subject. HISTORY OF HEBREW LITERATURE. 169 The various kinds of parallelism have generally been reduced into three classes, namely, synonymous, antithetic, and synthetic ; but these are hardly sufficient to embrace all the varieties of constructions which exist in Hebrew poetry. Still, as this arrangement is the one generally adopted, and as it will suffice to give the reader an idea of the principal forms which are met with, we shall retain it here. I. Synonymous Parallelism. This class embraces such modes of expression in which an idea, for the sake of emphasis, is again repeated, either by employing nearly the same words again, or by more or less varying the language, as : ■i. '.>•■ 23. " Adah and Zillah, hear my yoice, Wives of Lamech, give ear to my .speech ! For I have slain a man to my wounding, And a young man to my hurt ; 24. If Cain shall be avenged sevenfold, Then Lamech seventy and sevenfold." (Gen. iv- 23, 24.) It will be seen that the sentiment expressed in the first line is repeated in the second, and that of the third in the fourth ; the language, therefore, does not necessarily imply that Lamech had killed two persons ; " a man," and " a young man," are merely parallel expressions, both referring to one person, and not to two different persons, as has been supposed by many commentators. The reader, on referring to the Bible, will see that the above poetical effusion is very abruptly introduced without its hav- ing the slightest connection either with what precedes or follows. The Scriptures, too, nowhere furnish the least hint as to what prompted this address. No wonder, then, that the passage has generally been looked upon as one of the most obscure in the Old Testament. Still, whilst we have no histo- rical data to guide us in the elucidation of the passage, the deficiency is, in my opinion, to some extent supplied by the information thfvi; may be gathered from the address itself. It is quite evideiit from the two last lines of the address, that Lamech compares some less heinous deed of his with the cold- blooded and unprovoked murder which Cain had committed. It is, therefore, highly probable, that Lamech had been attacked and wounded by some one, and in defending himself had the misfortune to kill his assailant. His wives would natu- rally stand in great dread, lest some of the deceased's friends would seek for vengeance. The custom to avenge the blood of a relative is a very ancient one, and was carried to fear- ful extremes. It was often made to serve as an excuse for fierce persecution, and for exercising personal animosity or vindictiveness. Hence Moses, in order to put a stop to this ^^''n.i '\'{ M '\'%.\ ' tui .j. !::I 170 HISTORY or HEBREW LITBRATURI. iadiscriminate avenging of blood, laid down a series of laws about homicide, in which provision is made for the protection of any one, killing by accident or self-defence. Lamech, therefore, in order to allay the fears of his wives, endeavours to assure them that there was no cause for anxiety, for if Qod will avenge Cain sevenfold, who out of mere jealousy and without any provocation killed his brother, how infinitely gi'eater will be the punishment of him who will attempt to injure me, having merely acted in self-defence. Surely God, who in His infinite mercy promised to protect the fratricide, will likewise protect me. This seems to me to be the true import of Lamcch's address. It may, however, be asked why introduced just in that place ? Perhaps, the verse preceding the ^ix^ldress may furnish an answer. It is there stated that Tubal-Cain was the inventor of instruments of brass and iron. May not, then, this assault on Lamech have taken place soon after the invention of instruments ? We have, alas ! in our days, only too many instances of maiming and murder, as the result of carrying weapons. In chapter xlix. there are several very beautiful synonymous parallelisms, but I have selected the one contained in verses five, six, and seven, as aflTording another striking example of the necessity to strictly attending to parallel expressions : 5. " Simeon and Levi are brethren ; Instruments of violence are their swords. 6. " In *heir council enter not, my soul, In their assembly do not join, my heart : For in their an^^er they slew a man, And in their wantonness they houghed an ox. 7. " Cursed be their anger, for it was fierce. And their wrath, for it was cruel ; . !^ I will disperse them in Jacob, . /* I will scatter them in Israel." The reader will perceive how beautifully the idea expressed in one line is repeated again in the following line. It is, how- ever, necessary to offer a few explanatory remarks in order to make the parallelism more apparent, and also because the rendering which I have given materially differs from that in the English version, " Simeon and Levi are brethren," i. e., they are not only the sons of the one mother, but possess likewise the same wicked disposition. It is to this bad character of theirs, that the passage refers. This wicked disposition they evinced in their being associated in the treacherous murder of the Shechemites, recorded in Gen. xxxiv. 25, 26, 27. According to the uniform tradition of the Jews, too, they were also the chief instiga- tors of the conspiracy against Joseph. " Instruments of vio- HISTORY OF HEBREW LITERATURB. m lence are their swords." In the English version it is rendered, "instruments of cruelty are their habitations." The translators have evidently derived Qn''t1*lD)3 (mecherothehem) which I have rendered by "their swords," from n^tlSJa (mechurah), which, however, denotes birth or nativity, and not habitation. In the English Bibles containing marginal readings, in the margin it is rendered " their swords are weapons of violence," which precisely accords with my rendering, and is no doubt the correct one ; for there is a distinct allusion in the passage to the slaughter of the Shechemites, " Simeon and Levi, Dinah's brethren, took each man his sword, and came upon the city boldly, and slew all the males." (Qen. xxxiv. 25.) " In their assembly do not join my heart." The Hebrew word *niSi (kavod) honour, glory, is in poetry often employed to denote the heart, the spirit, as the noblest part of man ; as, for instance, Psalm xvi. 9, " Therefore my heart is glad, and my spirit rejoiceth." Eng. version : " My glory rejoiceth." Hence we fre- quently find it stands in parallelism with life, heart, or apiHt, and in all these passages the rendering of the English version, " my glory rejoiceth," does not afford a clear meaning. In the above passage it is better to render it "heart," as it stands in parallelism with " soul." " For in their anger they slew a man, and in their wanton- ness they houghed an ox." The last clause of this passage is rendered in the English version : " and in their self will they digged down a wall." The translators must have read "^^^ (shur) " a w^all," instead of ii^' (shor) " an ox," in which they have evidently followed the Chaldee, Syriac, and Vulgate ver- sions. There are, however, several important objections to this emendation of the word. In the firet place, there is no allusion in the history to which it refers, to the digging down of any w^all, or the destruction of the city, it is merely said, " they spoiled," i. e. plundered, the city. See Gen. xxxiv. 27. Secondly, the verb ipj (akar) in the Piel conjugation is in Scripture only used in the sense to hough, to hamstring, i. e., to cut the back sinews of the legs of horses by which they are rendered useless. See Josh. xi. 6. 9 ; 2 Sam. viii. 4 ; 1 Chron. xviii. 4. Thirdly, '^^"^J) (shor) stands in parallel with ijjii^ {ish) a man, both nouns evidently refer to one and the same sub- ject. It is better, therefore, to retain the present reading of the Hebrew text, and render " an ox," which is here employed figuratively to denote a man of distinction, and refers to Hanior, the prince of the country, or Shechem, his son, whom the two sons of Jacob induced to be circumcised, and whilst thus disabled fell upon them, and slew them. Many commen- tators take the nouns ish and shor collectively, and refer the ^1 H &■■ •f. 172 HISTORY OF HEBKEW LITERATURE. first noun to the inhabitants of Shechem, and the second to Hamor and his son Shechem, which is quite admissible. Thus Boothroyd renders : " For in their anger they slew the men, And in their self- will cat oflf the princeas." Similarly also the eminent Biblical scholar Kennicott : " For in their an(;er they slew the men ; ■' ■ And in their fury, they destroyed the princes," Not a few render, "they houghed or maimed oxen," and take it in a literal sense, as referring to a portion of the cattle which Jacob's sons destroyed, as it was impossible for them to drive all away. But, on referring to Gen. xxxiv. 28, it will be seen that the language is too explicit to admit of such an inter- pretation, for it is there distinctly stated, that "they took their sheep, and their oxen, and their asses, and that which was in the city, and that which was in the field." We may observe, too, that in Scripture princes or men of distinction are in other places of the Old Testament spoken of under the figure of bulla. Thus, (Psalms xxii. 13, Eng. vers. v.1.2): , " Many bulls have encompassed me, '' ' Strong bulls of Bashan nave beset me around." ' ' So again, (Psalms Ixviii. 31, Eng. vers. v. 30) : = " I will disperse them in Jacob," i. e., I predict that they shall surely be dispersed. The prophets, in order to give greater force to their declarations, sometimes declare themselves to do what they merely predict would come to pass. So Eze- kiel, xliii. 3, says : " When I came to destroy the city," i. e., when I came to prophesy that the city should be destroyed. We will now adduce a few examples of parallelism from the poetical books : ' i • , " Seek ye Jehovah, while He may be found ; < i ' \. Call ye upon Him while He is near ; Let the wicked forsake his way ' ' ■ I , And the unrighteous man his thoughts, And let him return unto the Jehovah, and He will hare mercy upon him, And unto our (iod,for He will abundantly pardon." — (Lit. will multiply to pardon.) (Isa. It. 6, 7.) 1.-. " For affliction cometh not out of the dust, And trouble springeth not out of the ground." (Job v. 6.) " Happy is the man that findeth wisdom, / ' ^r, man 4.) Here the idea expressed in the two first lines is constantly kept in view in the subsequent verses. Another beautiful example of this kind of parllelism we have in Ecclesiastes xii. lto7. 1. •' But remember thy Creator in the days of thy youth. While as yet the evil days come not, and the years draw nigh. When thou shalt say, I have no pleasure in them. 2. While the sun, and the light, and the moon, and the stars be not darkened. And the clouds return after the rain. 3. In the day when the keepers of the house^ahall tremble, And the strong men bow themselves down^ And the grinders cease because they have become few ; And those that look out of the windows be darkened. 4. And the doors are shut in the street, | Wheu the sound of the mill is low ; Ar.d he shall rise up at the voice of the bird And all the daughters of the song shall be brought low. 6. Also for a height they are afraid, and terrors are in the way ; And the almond tree casts off it» Jiowera, And the locust becomes a burden. And the caper-berry fails ; For man goes to his long home, And the mourners go ^^ut in the street. 6. Before the silver cord be ioosed, And the golden bowl be broken. And the bucket be broken at the fountain. And broken the wheel at the cistern. 7. And the dust return to the earth as it was ; And the spirit to tiod who gave it." Coals of fire"— poetically used for lightning. • ither the verb ms {pdrcich) to sprout, to flourish, or the verb v^ij (nuts) to flourish* Many critics, and among them Schroder and Gesenius, have, therefore, abandoned the rendering of the old versions, and rendered " and the almond is rejected or despised," it is, owing to the toothless condition of the aged, they have to abstain from eating it. As the term np''JD {shtd-ed) Hignities both an almond tree and almond nut, there is no objection to this rendering, whilst at the same time it preserves the proper meaning of the verb. Still, as the toothless condition of old aii;e has alrendy been sufiiciently depicted in verses 3, 4, it is, therefore, not likely that the subject would here again be introduced after other infirmities have been noticed. Besides, the portraiture of old age would hardly be perfect without some allu.sion to such a distinctive mark of old age as the hoary head. I think, therefore, the passage would be better rendered, " and the almond tree casts ofl' its floivers," this rendering, as I have already stated, (p 9(i) will not only preserve the proper meaning of the Hebrew verb, but will impart additional force, since it will include the idea of the fallitiy off of the ivhite hair, which is so very common in advanced years. Dachsel has taken a similar view of the passage, he observes, "the almond tree, with its reddish flowers, which in late winter strews the ground with its blossoms, which have gradually become white like snow-flakes, is an emblem of the winter of old age with its falling silvery hair." " And the locust becomes a burden." The species of locust denoted by ^^n (chagav) is according to Lev. xi. 22, permitted to be eaten. It is said that it is even to this day brought into the market for sale, and that the hard shelled ones resembled I ■■ TB ''i\ 1 V * In order to get over the difficulty which the verb presents in obtaining the meaninfic to Jloarith, some critics have regarded l>"k»5l (j/**"*'*) *s an irregular future Hiphit form for >i^^n ij/aneta) from to the old man, whose appetite fails, or who caniidt digest it. "And the caper-berry fails." This berry is sai " spake y refer to who met and to osed that (S to this joice, and we must, I Creator." js system, the chain life is ind, when in pieces, dicate the fountain," ea is here aps befall likewise ath must a more jceeded in ^ves, with md have "' And the jxpression lad, " And there is I " dust" in thou ai% and unto dust thou shalt rfturn." The body always remains dust, hence Eliphaz speaks of the human bodies, as " houses of clay." (Job. iv. 19) And the Psalmist says, " thou takest away their breath, they die, and return to their dust." St. Paul too, e»dls the botfy an " earthly house". (2 Cor. v. 1.) " And the spirit shall return to God who gavo it." With such a distinct declaration before us, it is somewhat .surprising that any one should still doubt whether the doctrine of the iuunor- tality of the soul is to be found in the Old Testament writings. This passage alone, if the Old Testament did not furnish any other proof, ought to be quite sufficient to dispel any doubt on this subject. But thin is by no means the only portion of the Old Testament Scriptures which sets forth this vital doctrine, which is the very corner stone of religion, and affords so much comfort, consolation, and real happiness to the pilgrim in his journey through life. There are many more equally as conclusive proofs as this o le, though not so strikingly apparent in the English version, since the most important Hebrew terms, as well as many entire passages bearing strongly upon this question, are altogether mistrans- lated, and to this, no doubt, may be ascribed that so many English readers of the Bible have experienced a difficulty in perceiving how clearly the doctrine is set forth from the beginning to the end of the Old Testament. Thus, for example, the Hebrew term blS^'O (sheol) by which the place of departed spirits is denoted, and which either •should have been retained as a proper name, or the Greek equivalent i^acZes adopted, is in the English version always ren- dered by " grave," " pit," or " hell," but which, in many places, are not proper equivalents for the Hebrew term sheol. Many German writers render sheol by Untenvelt, i. e., the lower world ; which although not exactly a proper equivalent, yet is far better than the English rendering " grave." Thus the patriarch Jacob, when overwhelmed with grief at the bereave- ment of his beloved son Joseph, still found comfort in the hope of meeting him in a future life. " I will go down into sheol unto my sou mourning." (Gen. xxxvii. 35.) In the Eng- hsh version it is rendered " into the grave," but Jacob could not have expected to meet with his .son in the grave, for he thought he had been devoured by wild beasts. Besides, if the patriarch had reallj' meant the grave he would have made use of the word i^p {kever) which is the proper term for grave. It is, however, proper to remark here, that whilst the term »hedl primarily denotes the realm of departed spirits, and is generally used in that sense, yet like many other tenris of 'places, it is sometimes employed in a restricted sense to denote I !! i 'I ;" i m •Mil i ^ 180 HISTORY OF HEBREW LITERATURE. the place of punishment of the imcked after death, or hell aA it is generally rendered, but this is always clearly indicated by the context. Thus in Prov. xxiii. Hi, 14, we read : < , " Witliliold not correction from tlie child ; For if thou chaaiiiteat him with the rud, he shall not die. Yea, thou ahait chiuteii liim with the rod, And tliou wilt deliver his guuI trum iheot," (Kn^ Ter. "hell.") Now, here the terms " die," "sheol," cannot possibly be taken in their ordinary acceptation, foi it Ih the common lot of all men to die, and for all souls to go down into sheol, from these there is no posHible deliverance. The phrases " he shall not die," " deliver his soul from aheol,^' can, therefore, only find theii- true explanation when we regard thum as having reference to the future punishment for sin8. From this a parent's timely correction, by God's grace, may save a child, by causing him to turn from his evil way. Thi.s is, no doubt, what Solomon intends here to inculcate, and the translators have, therefore, in my opinion, correctly rendered here sheol by "hell." We may refer the reader also to Ps. ix. 18 (Eng. ver. v. 17.} " Tlie wioked shall turn into sheol ; All the nations for^ttting Hod." • It is, the wicked having stood in judgment and being condeuinef/j"o»i turmoil, " . And there the wearied in strength are at rest.'— (Job. iii. 13, 17.) The first passage to which I would call the reader's attention where the rephaim are distinctly spoken of is that recorded in Is. xiv. 9. The prophet in hi.s exquisitely beautiful and vivid prediction of the downfall of the last king of Babylon, puts in the mouth of the captive Israelites a song of triumph, com- mencing at verse 4. In order to deipict more completely the universal jo}'^ that should prevail at the downfall of this t'ommon enemy, the prophet beautifully represents the cypresses and cedars, those majestic trees of Lebanon, which like the inhabitants also sufl'rred from the ravages of war, as likewise partaking in the joy. Here one might naturally have expected that the prophet would have completed his graphic r('i»resentation of the univei.sal joy, but not so, by one ot the ■ oldest prosopopaiias that has ever been attempted in poetry, liL' suddenly changes the scene from the earth to the regions of tlu' spirit world, and with .a brevity yet sublimity of diction, tliiit has called forth the universal admiration of writers of overy shade of belief, he represents the whole sheol in com- liiution at the approach of tlie once mighty monaicU of Uabylon. 8 " SLeol (hades) from beneath is moved concerning thee, to meet thee at thy coming ; it stirretii up tlie ireiihalm) the filiades tor tiiee, all the great ones of the earth. It causeth to rise from their thrones, all the kings of the nations, t. e., ^the shades of tlie kin»3.) All of them be^'in to speak and say unto thee : Art tliou also, even thou, become weak like us ? Art thou becor,3 like unto us ! (Lsa. 9, 10.) Here then, we have as clear and O'stinct allusion made to the rephaim, spirits or shades in sheol as language can possibly express it. But it will probably be said that this is mere figurative language, and that no one would take this in a literal sense ; certainly not, the language is, no doubt, figura- tive, but the objects mentioned are, nevertheless, red. Belshazzar, the last of the Chaldean kings, is a real personage, and so are the cedars and cypresses of Lebanon real objects, and will it be said that the (rephaim) spirits wh> form an important part of the sacred writer's picture, are merely imaginary creatures ? What object could the prophet hav«> HISTORY OF HEBUEW LITERATURE. 18$ had to introduce such visionary beings with the real ones ? Would his picture of general joji not have been complete without creating phantoms to embellish it? It could certainly not have been in order to add force to his prophecy, for it would in reality have had quite the contraiy effect, and only have tended to weaken it in the eyes of his countrymen, and render it loss credible. Theie is, in fact, no room liere for cavelling; we have but one alternative, either to regard all the objects mentioned as real beings, or view them all as visionary, and we may safely leave it to the candid reader to decide for himself. We find the repkaim again mentioned in Job xxvi. 5, (J : " The (rephidm) shades tremhle beneath,* ' The waters tremhli and their inhabitants. Shcol is naked before him, And there is no covering TIT^S^D (laavaddon) to the place of destruction." Job represents in the chapter the incomprehensible and all pervading power of God, whether in shcM the realm of spirits, in the waters, on earth, in the atmosphej-e or in heaven. If the reader will turn to the chapter he will perceive that Job sets out from the abode of spirits, and gradually ascends upwards. In the ii..»t clause of versi; five Job n^presents the repkdim as trembling at tb'? power of God, and in tlic second clause the waters and their inhabitants, the I'eader will thus perceive that these repliahn are again spoken of as objeets that liave a real existence, just as " the waters and their inhabitants," with which they stand in |)arallelism. In the l^jUglish version vei)h(t'na in the passage befoi'e us, is rendered l)y '• dead things," a signification which it never has, and is not so rendered in any other version. The Chaldee version lias 5<''1i5 ((/(ivraijd) flie (j'uinfi^ or mig/iti/ men, and in a similar manner it is i-endered in the Syriac, the Scptuagint, the Vulgate, the German, and other versions. These versions have taken the word in a restricted sense here, and applied it only to the sfuuh's of those impious and gigantic races of the Canaanites, the j?azumim, the Enim, and Anakini mentioned in Scripture, since they are also desigiiate<], in the (^Id Testa- ment rc'phdiiii, which is, however, a diHerent word from that which denotes departed spirits. (See Geicnius's, or any other good Hebrew Lexicon.) Still, even according U) the rendering of these versions, it applies to «lepaited spirits, and my argument is, therefore, not in the least affected. All eminent modern critics and cotnmentators, on the contrary, have rendered it by Schatten, I. e., spirits or shades. So Rosen- ♦Some read "beneath" with the next clause, and render "the wato">! beneath tremble," but the rendering above given, I think, acconls better witli the context .1 Hi ; ! 't' 184 HISTORY OF HEBREW LITERATURE. miillei, Ewald, Hahn, Geseiiins, &c. T find \t is, likewise, so rendered iti tlie Jewish ver-sion made by Solomon Hakkohen, Die Schntten hehen da unten, " the shades tremble beneath there." As this is a very important subject, we will refer to one passage nmre, and select one from the Proverbs. In eh. xxi. 16, Solomon declares : 11'. - , " The man that wandereth out of the way of understanding, Sliall rumaiii in the congregation of the rephuim.' (Eng. ver., " the congregation of the dead.") Flere the (rephaim) shades of the wicked are spoken of as a *' congregation" among whom the spirit of every one '• that wanilercth from the Avay of understanding (or piety)" is doomed to dwell. Now a "congregation" implies an assemblage of j»eople, at. least the Hebrew word bnp {knhal) here emplo3-ed is only used in reference to the assembling of people or nations, e^'en if a gathering of othei* living objects are spoken of the term XMS (edah) an assembly is then employed, as for examphi Jud. xiv. 8; Ps, Ixviii. 31. It is, therefore, not stretching criticisin too far to say, that the sacred writer designedly uses here the term ^riiS fcahal) in reference to the assembly of human souls of wicked men now inhabiting sheol It is altogethei- incomprehensible what meaning the trans- lators intended to convey by rendering "the congregation of the de:,d ?" If intended merely to refer to "the dead" in the graves, it would, to say the least, be a very strange, if not altogether unintelligible expression. But this is not all, it w^ould also render this very impressive declaration perfectly meaningless, since the pious, the good, the just, as well as those that wander " out of the wav of understanding" have to "remain in the congregation of the dead" until the day of the resurrection. The term 5riD (fcdhal) as I have already stated, according to Scripture usage, is only applied to the assembling of livivff hnraan heivgs, although it probably occurs no less than a hundred times in the Old Testament, not in a single instance is it used othei'wise except in the passage before us, wheie the sacred writer, no doubt, designedly ap[)lied it to the assemblage of human souls. If, on the contrary, we are to understand l)y " the dead" as given in the English version the diseinhodied souls, then that rendering does certainly not convey the meaning to the ordinarj' reader which it was intended it should convey, and is, therefore, not a proper equivalent for the Hebrew term rephaim. The ancient Jews held that sheol was a vast receptacle or region where the departed spirits dwell until the day of the resurrection, when thev would be united again with their HISTORY OF HEBREW LITERATURE. 185 bodies. The souls of the righteous, according to their belief, dwell in the upper legion, which they designated the inferior paiadise, whiht the lower region was the place assigned to the souls of the wicked, which they called Qjn '^!l (Gr^i' Hinnom) Gehenna, which originally was the name of a valley on the south and west of Jerusalem. This valley being noted for the human sacrifices here offered to the idol Moloch, and after- wards for its becoming the receptacle for all the filth of the city, by an easy metaphor its name was transferred to the place of punishment in the other world, and to the abode of the souls of the wicked. Now, the belief that the souls of the wicked inhabit the lower region of sheol is, no doubt, founded upon ceiiain passages of Scripture in which the lower or loivest sheol is especially mentioned. Thus, for example, Deut. xxxii. 22 : " For a fire is kindled in my anj»er, And it shall burn unto the lowest sheol." (Eng. ver., " the lowest hell.") So again in P.salm Ixxxvi. 13 : " For preat is thy mercy towards me, And thou deliverest my soul from the lowest sAeo?." (Eng. ver., "Ic h!. hell.") Again in Pro v. ix. 18 : " But he regariled not that the rei)haim are there ; That lier guests are in the valleys of sheol." (Eng. ver., " in the depths of hell.") In order to understand fully the force of this passage, it must be taken in connection with what precedes. In verses 13 to 19, follji is personified under the image of a foolish woman sitting at her door, and in the high places of the city, calling to those who go straight on their ways : " Whosoexer is simple let him come hither : And whoso laeketh understanding to liim she said. Stolen waters are sweet, Aud .secret bread, (I. e., bread to be eaten in secret) is pleasant." The two last lines contain an oinontal proverb, meaning that everythinfi forbidden, and everything that requires to be done in secret has a sjwcial charm. Many a giddy and thoughtless person will allow himself to be allured by folly '.s seductive voice, without, for a moment, consiflcring the consequences of the fearful step, without regarding that the rephaim of those that have accepted the invitation of folly " are in the valleys of sheol" i. e., in the very depths of it. I beg the reader particularly to notice, that the (rephaim) shades, spirits, or souls — the reader may choose any one of these terms as an equivalent for the term rephaim — of those who, from time to time, have allowed themselves to be enticed away 24 14 JH ! I" I •■. 'I 11 186 HISTORY OF HEBRKW LITERATURE. from the upright path, and have beccine the "guests" of folly are here represented as real beings now inhabiting the veiy depths of sJieul. 1 have ulready stated tliat the term sheol is always rendered in the English version either by pit, grove, or htll, but never by its proper meaning, the realm or abode of deiiarted s'pirits, in order that the reader who is not acquainted with Hebrew may be enabled to judge for himself from the eontext which would be the most suitable rendering of the Hebrew term in any passage where it is employed, I have given below a list of all the places where the word occurs in the Old Testament, so that the reader will have only to substitute the word sheol instead of the word grave, pit, or hell, as the case may be* There have, comparatively speaking, been but few attempts made by the so-called liberal critics and intei-preters of the German school, to explain away either the real existence of a sheol or that of the rephaun that inhabit it, the teaching of Scripture is so clear on these points that it admits of >io cavilling. The explanation, however, very frequently givon by them, wliy those spirits do not give praise in nheol is so unscriptural, that it deserves, at least, a passing notice. We may quote a remark of De Wctte on the subject, which does not materially differ from other writers of this school. In treating on Ps. vi. 6 (Eng. ver. v. 5 :) " For there is not in death renieinbrauce of thee ; In sheol who shall praise thee V he observes : " The conjuiations of the dead incontrovertibly prove the belief of the continual existence of the dead. That they do not praise God in the lower world arises from their being devoid of thought, or rather from the mournful condi- tion of their existence." (Connnentary on the P.salms.) Now, this is all mere conjecture, and has not a shadow of Scriptural authority in support of it. The Scri|)tures, from beginning to end, teach that man is accountable for his deeds done in the flesh, and for these he has to render an account at the day of judgment, and as no prayers could avail anythiirg after the spirit leaves the body, hence they are always represented as in the above passage, that they give no praise in sheol. " And the spirit shall return to God who gave it." Ratio- • Gen. xxxvii. 35 ; xlii. 38 ; xliv. 29. 31<: Num. xvi. 30, 33 : Deut. xxxii. 22. 1 Sam. ii. 6 : 2 Saru. xxii. (J : 1 Kings ii. 6, 9 : Job vii. 9 ; xi. 8 ; xiv. 13, 1(3 ; xxi. 13 ; xxiv. 19 ; xxvi. 6 : Ps. vi. 6, (Kng. ver. v. 5) ; ix. 18, (Eng. ver. v. 17) ; xvi. lu ; xviii. a (Kng. ver. v. 6) ; xxx. 4 (Eng. ver, v. 3) ; xxxi. 18 (Eng ver. v. 17) xlix. 15 16 (Eng. Ver. vs. 14 15); Iv. 16 (Eng. ver. v. 15) ; Ixxxv. 13 ; Ixxxviii. 4 (Eng. ver. V. 3) ; Ixxxix. 49 (Eng. ver. v. 48 ; cxvi. 3 ; cxxxix. 8 ; cxli. 7 : Fruv. i. 12 ; v. 5 ; vii. 27 ; ix. 18 ; xv. 11, 24 ; xxiii. 14, xxvii. 20 ; xxx. 16 : Keel. ix. 10 : Is. v. 14 ; xiv. 9, 11, 15; xxviii. 15, 18; xxxviii. 10; lvii.9: Ezek. xxxi. 15, 16.17; xxxii. 27 : Hos. xiii. 14 : Am. ix. 2 : Jon. ii. 2 : Hab. ii. 5. HISTORY OF HEBREW LITERATURE. 187 nalistic interpreters find in this passage "a pantheistic diffusion and absorption of the soul, namely, that the spirit of man after leaving the body will be again united with the spirit of God. Hitzig, whose views on this subject may be taken as a sample of those held by the school to which he belongs, observes, " This particle of the Divine breath poured out by God into the world and sepa. .ucd to an individual existence, will be drawn back again to its source, and united again with God's breath, which is the soul of the world." We have here another example of the arbitrary mode of interpretation so frequently adopted by the rationalistic writers. They put their own construction upon the passage, regardless whether it accords or not with what Solomon has said in another place. The proper principle of criticism is, if the meaning of a passage is doubtful, to compare it with other passages of Scripture, and thus endeavour to arrive at its proper sense. Now, this ahKorption theory has not the slightest foundation in Scripture, it was not entertained by Solomon or any of the other sacred writers. In chapter xi. 9, Solomon addresses the following advice to the " young man :" " Rejoice, young man, in thy youth, and let thy heart cheer thee in the days of thy youth, and walk in the ways of thine heart, and in the sight of thine eyes: but know thou that for all these things God will bring thee into judgment." Here the sacred writer reminds the young, that whilst they are permitted to enjoy themselves in the days of their youth, yet they must never forget that God will bring tliem to account for all their actions. The judgment here s|)i;ken of unquestionably refers to the judgment after death, and is, therefore, altogether irieconcihible with the absorption theory. In the Chaldee version the passage, " and the spirit shall return unto God who gave it," is paraphrased " and thy spirit shall return to stand in judgment V)efore God who gave it." llabbi Akavia promulgated the following sentiment : " Ponder on three things, and thou shalt not enter into trans- gression : consider whence thou comest jind whither thou art going, and before whom thou art destined to give an account " (Ethics of the Jewish Fathers.) This clearly shows that the ancient Jews had no symj)athy with the ahwrption theory. In Scripture, death is frequently spoken of as sleep, and the resiu'vection, as the awaking from sleep. Thus Job .says : ^H: •I H ■n m: ' 1' " So man lietli down, and riseth not ; Until tlie heavens are no more, tliey shall not awake, And shall not be arouseil out of their sleep."— (ch. xiv. Yl.) So David "' As for me, I will behold thy face in righteousnf ss : I shall be satisfied when I awake in Thy likeness."— (Ps. xvii. 15.) V 188 HISTORY OF HEBREW LITERATURE. It is impossible to conceive a more pointed reference to the resurrection of the dead, than that which "s afforded in this declaration of the Psalmist. He here sets forth that his happi- ness will be complete when he awakes from the slumber of death in the likeness of God, This must be the meaning of the language employed : it cannot mean anything else : the language in the oi iginal altogether forbids any other construc- tion being forced upon it. I am quite aware that strenuous attempts have been made by many writers to divest the passage of this meaning ; and, to give the reader an idea of the ingenuity which has been displayed to effect it, I will adduce a few examples. Hensler and Hitzig, explain the passage in question, " I will be satisfied when I awake in the morning with a full assurance of Thy presence to deliver me from my enemies." Hupfeld explains it, " that as often as the psalmist awakes, the presence of God bursts anew upon him like a sun." Ewald regards this Psalm as " an evening song, and that the Psalmist expresses a hope that on awakening in the morning he may have pleasant views of God." But this is simply forcing their own suppositions upon the language of the sacred writer. In plain words, it is nothing less than trifling with the language of Holy Writ. The Hebrew word nDl73?l (ternunaJi), means a likeness or image, and nothing else, and there cannot be adduced one single instance either from the Hebrew Scriptures or any other Hebrew work where it is used in any other sense. Daniel also speaks of the resurrection of the death in unmistakable language, he says : " And many of them that sleep in the dust of the earth shall awake, some to everlasting life, and some to shame and to everlasting contempt." — (ch. xii. 2.) We might go on quoting many more passages from the Old Testament Scriptures, setting forth the immortality of the .soul, the intermediate state of the departed spirits, and the resurrection, but those we have adduced are quite sufficient to show the utter fallacy of the absorption theory of our modern critics, which would render the terms sheol and rephaim, and the passages speaking of the awaking from the sleep of death, and of the day of judgment altogether meaningless. The absorption theory is so atrocious, so repulsive, that the only charitable conclusion we can come to is, that its defenders cannot have given a moment's thought what it really implies. According to that theory the soul of the wicked, no matter how deeply stained with sin, it makes one shudder to write it, becomes again united with the pure spirit of God. The renowned writer, Hengstenberg, has very properly observed in his remarks on Ecclesiastes xii. 7, " The doctrine of the Old Testament is, that righteousness and sin stamp an indelible HISTORY OF HKBREW LITER ATUUK. 18^ character on the soul. It if impossible that the distinction between the righteous and the wicked so emphatically insisted upon, should be all at once rf duced to naught in the moment 01 death. Against such a view is decisive ; moreover, the piercing seriousness with w^tiich future judgment is anounced everywhere, and especially in this book " I have been induced to otter those somewhat lengthy remarks in refutation of the absorption theory, as there nre other erroneous theories enter- tained by many on the important subject of the immortality of the soul, some even of very recent origin, and against whieli my remarks will hold good with equal force. There can be no doubt that much of the misapprehension existing on this highly momentous subject is owing to the mistranslation of Hebrew teim-j and entire passages in the English version, and it is to be hop^d that those mistranslations have received the careful attention of those who have been entrusted with the execution of the Keiv Version. We have said that parallelism is the chief characteristic of Hebrew poetry, which, as will have been seen from the examples given, does not consist either in rhyme, or in the synimetr}' of the sentences — though in the more strictly poetical books as Job, the Psalms, anil Proverbs, the sentences are more generally uniform than in the other poetical books — but rather in the symmetry of thoiujhts * A wi'iter has veiy properly remarked that " Rhythm, which is a fundamental law of the voice, can never be entirely wanting in any human discourse. But it appears the more distinctly as the waves of the voice swell higher with the increasing elevation of feeling, anfl the mass and power of the rhythmical movement increases in proportion ; consequently the effort to preserve an equilibrium is more decided, and the successive risings and fallings extend further. This takes place the most perfectly in poetry — when the soul tuned in harmony with the gently swelling wave of life, pours out her thought in svmmetrical ranks which are sometimes merely internal, expressed only in the fl/onyhts — as in the Hebrew pai'allelism, and the poetry of tht; people in general, and sometimes they are also external, expressed in the par- * Azarias, a learned Rabbi, who flourished in the sixteenth century, was the first of the Jewish writers who called attention tc this characteiibtic of Hebrew poetry. In a work called (Meor Enayim) i. e., the Uoht of the p.vcjt— ^jrobahly so called from the iireat variety of subjects it treats on, historical, philosophical, and critical —devotes a chapter to the subject of Hebrew poetry, in which he expresses his opinion, "that although the sacretl songs have a certain measure or proportions, yet they do not consist in the number of syllables, perfect or imperfect, but in the number of things or parts of things; that is, the subject and the predicate and their adjuncts, in every sen- tence and proposition. Thus a phrase, ccntaining two parts of a proposition, contains two measures." and another containing two more, and tiny become for.r measures. Azarias published this work at Montua, his birth-place, in 1574. Thf re are several Latin translations of this work extant. It was Uishop Lowth, however, who perfected the present system of parallelism, and has since then been universally adapted. , : 's !' : 1 i i i , -I II! I 1^:/-'^ O/O/^A/CVv' 190 HISTORY OF HEBREW LITERATURE. ticular sounds, as in the poetry of the Greeks and other nations, which is measured by syllables." Another characteristic of Hebrew poetry is gradation, i e., M'here every succeeding expression is heightened in force, as : " He sitting in the tieavens shall laugh : The Lon) shall deride them. Then shall He speak niito them in his aiiKer, And in His wratii He shall confound them."— (Ps. ii. 4, 5.) Here it will be observed, that at first God is represented as merely laughing at the designs of the impious kiiigs of the «arth, then as deriding them, then as speaking to them in His anger, and lastl}' as confounding them in His wrath. Frequently, too, we find two definite numbers employed, the H 'cond gre&ter than the first, \n order to express an indefinite number, as: " In six troubles he sliall deliver thee : And in seven no evil shall touch thee. — (Job. v. 19.) The number six must therefore not be taken literally, but to <;xpress a large number, which is still increased by the larger number seven. As much as to say, hi a very great many troubles, he will deliver thee : " (iive a portion to seven, and also to eight ; for thou knowest not what evil shall be upon the earth."— (Eccl. xi. 2.) It is, give a portion of the bread to many, for thou knowest not what evil may at any time befall thee, when thou mayest thyself stand in need of assistance. For similar expressions, see Job xxxiii, 14; xl. 5. : Amos 1, 3, G, 9, 11. There is. another kind of gradation which we frequently meet with, and which consists in a thought or idea that has just been expressed being again taken up and more fully carried out, as : " CuRiK TK Mkroz, said the angel of the Lord, CcRSK TK bitterly its inhabitants ; « Foe thkt camk not to thk hklp ov tub Lord, ToTHi HBiP OP TUB LoRD a),'ainst the mighty."— (Song of Deborah, Jud. v. 23.) " Goo OP VKNOKAKCE, Jehovah ; God of venqbanck, shine forth." — (Ps. xciv. 1.) We have yet to notice another characteristic of Hebrew poetry, and that is, the use of certain words which are only found in the poetical writings, and for which others are employed in the prose writings. As for example, fib)3 ('millah), a word in poetry ; ^'21 (davar), a word in prose ; 'ffi^5i5 (enosh) a man, poetry ; Qli^ (adam) a man, prose ; nfli^ {athah) to come, poetry ; u^ia i^^^) ^^ com£, prose, &c. Also, the use of certain epithets for substantives, as fiDl^b HISTORY OF HKBUKW LITERATURK. 191 {levdnah) i. e. the vhite, for the moon. (Cant. vi. 10; Is. xxiv. 23.) In prose always ni"' (f/d'^'cdch) the rnoon ; ri'Sn [chani- mah) i.e. heat, for the sun, JoV) xxx. 28, Is. xxx. 2G ; in prose tOyiXO (shemesh) i. e. the sun, &c. So likewise the use of the construct plurnl form with prepo- sitions, as 1^3? (aie), for ^y (al) upon, •'bs^ (''^«) l''^»" bs^ (^'0 ^tiito, .... - " f I &c. Also, the use of the poetical pronominal suffix ^jj (mo), for QH {hem) them. And the Ghaldec plural ending it~ {i)i) instead of qi— (im). Now, all these characteristics of Hel^rew poetry are found in the books of the Prophets, as well as in the book of Job, the Psalms and the Proverbs, which are universally admitted to be poetical, and it follows, therefore, that the former, as well as the latter, must be cla.s,sed amonj;f the poetical wi'itings. It must be from a total disregard of these characteristics, or being perhaps misled by the somewhat sententious and regular form of construction of the lines that exist in Job, the Psalms, the Proverbs, Canticles, and in some of the i.solated poems of the Old Testament, that so many entertained the erroneous idea that the prophetical books were written in prose. Before conclu'ling our remarks on the characteristics of Hebrew poetry, we must add a few remarks upon the acroatic or alphabetical poems of the Old Testament. As Hebrew poetry is so entirely devoid of any outward ornamentation, it is somewhat surprising to tind already as early as the times of David and Solomon a class of poems, upon which in modern times much ingenuity has been expended. Modern acrostic poems are constructed so that the initial, and not unfrequently also the final letters may form a certain word or phrase, most commonly a name. Of this kind were the twenty-four hymns composed by Sir John Davis to Queen Elizabeth, in every one of which the initial letters of the lines form the words FIlizabkth Kegina. The acrostics of the Old Testament differ altogether from the modern acrostics as the former are entirely constructed upon the Heb)-ew alpha- bet, namely : Ps. xxv., xxxiv., xxxvii., cxi., cxii., cxix., cxlv : Prov. xxxi., vs. 10 to 31 ; Lament, i., ii., iii., iv. The form of these acrostics is, they consist of twenty-two lines or stanzas according to the number of letters in the Hebrew alphabet, and every line or stanza begins with each letter in regular order as it stands in the alphabet. Thus the first line begins with JS^ Ay the second with ;j B, &c. Of these acrostics, some, how- ever, are more perfect than others, as P.salms cxi., cxii., and Lament, iii. The two first consist of ten verses or stanzas each, every verse having two lines, except the two last which contain three lines each, thus making up the number twenty- ii y\. ' Ii: '^'W ^i ' 1 1 1 fi 192 HISTORY OF HRBHEW LITKRATUUE. I '^^ two. As in the Hebrow Bible, the staiizns or verses are not divided into lines ; we will "^^join here tlie first verse of Ps cxi. in regular lines, which will serve as a guide : nnb-bDS mn"" mix -^ •"niy^ Qi-iffl"' 1103 ^> The third of the perfect alphabetical poonis, namely, Lament. iii. consists of twenty-two stanzns of three lines each. We will here give the first word of the three linos as a guide : 2nd Stanza. riDa b 1st Stanza. In these peifeetly alphabetical poems the lines in each poem are strikingly equal to one another in length, and scarcelv less so in the number of words. Psaini cxix. is divided into twenty- two divisions or stanzas according to the number of letters in the Hebrew alphabet. Each of these divisions con.sists of eight verses, and all the verses of each division begins with the same initial, so that the eight verses of the first division l)egln with ;j^ (alcph), those of the second with 3 (beth) and those of the third with "y (f/lmel), &ic. The reader, on turning to the English Bible, will find each division named after the letter with which the verses begin in the original Hebrew. In some of these poems, how- ever, there will be found some irregularities, which may be imputed to the carelessness of the transcribers, or to the fact of not being able to find a word beginning with the letter required. Hence we find sometimes a letter was missed or repeated. Thus, for example, in Psalm xxv. there is no stanza apparently beginning with '2 (beth), unless we regard the word inbSft (eloliai) " 0 my God," as originally belonging to the fii'st verse, the next word 7j2i {beoha) would then afford the letter required. Rosenmliller and others suppose, that the word "Tlbi^ {(ilokai), like the interjectluns of the Greek tragic writers, was not reckoned with the verse. It is, however, not likely that such a practice prevailed among the Hebrews, and many translators, and among them Ewald, have read {Elohai) " 0 my God" 'v-'th the preceding verse, which makes good sen.se. In Psalm xxv., there is also no stanza beginning with the letter •\ (wav) and likewise no stanza beginning with the letter p (koph), but two stanzas commencing with the letter -| (resh.) The last verse of the Psalm which commences with the letter B (pe) is merely added as a concluding prayer, and forms no TT1 ! HISTORY or HEBRKW MTERATUUK. 193 ))ai't of tho alplialiotical poom. It is not easy to determine the (Icsif^n of this kind of pn (lifTorent wnys. When Duvid played Icforc^ Sunl, it is h^aid, "■ \h\ look tin- liaip, and ])Ijiycd witli his liuiid." — (1 Snin. xvi. '2.S.) But, accordin},' to .loscpluis, tlds instrument liad ten •strings, and was played upon with the pleetruni. — {Atit. vii eh. 1 2, sec. M.) The wind instnnnent which .Tid»al invented is in Hehnw cnHed |3;ji3? {i'\) whieli many ancient interpreters hehl to Jiave been a kind oi' Jfiitf, hut whether it was of th, .S14. 'I'Ik! .sulilime triumphal song of Moses, after the children of Israel had passed through the Red Sea, furnishes anotlier example where poetry and music went hand in hand. The hymn was composed for the occasion, and so, no douht, was the music to which it was sung. " Then sang Moses and the children of Jsrael the song to the LoiiD, and spake .saying: (Fxod. XV. I.) " I will sing to tlie Loul for He is jtlorinusljf exalted ; Thu lioi'HM 1111(1 itti rider liiitli ile thruwii into tliv Hua." When the men had MnisluMi, Miriam and all the women took up the song, but with the addition of accompanying them.s(!lves with tind)rels. " And Miriam, the prophetess, the sister of Aaion took the timhrel in her hand ; and all the women w^ent after h(!r with timbrel.s and with dances. And Miriam answered them : 1 ! H l!' ■'' 1 " Sing ye to the Lord for He is gloriously exalted ; The horse and its riiler uath He thrown into the sea." — (oh. xv. 1.) Born and brought up as Moses was in Egypt, it is no wonder that we now and then in the Pentateuch meet with manners and cu.stoms peculiar to his natal country. It will be seen from the above passage, that we have here two distinct choirs, the women singing separately fi-om the men. Now, fiom monuments it is evident that this custom prevailed in Egypt. Champollion discovered in the grottoes of Beni Hassan, "a picture which represented a concert of vocal and instrumental nuisic ; a singer is accompanied by a player upon the harp, and assisted by two choirs, one of which is composed of men and the other of women ; the latter beat time with their hnmh."- -{Letters,]). .53.) The first introduction of nnisical instruments in connection with religious service we find mentioned in Num. x. 2. Where God commanded Moses to make " tvo trumpets of .silver" which were to be used " for the calling of the a.ssembly, and for the journeying of the camps." This is also the first indica- . .« t dim I'« 1 196 HISTORY OF HEBRKW LITERATUUB. tion of this kind of wind instrument. Tt was perfectly simple in its structure being made "of a whole piece," .incl may, no doubt, be regardod as the type of the various metal wind instruments afterwards gradually introduced. There are indications that 'music was fostered in the institutions called the scliooLs of the prophets, which are believed to have been founded by the prophet Samuel. The passage which strongly favours this supposition occurs in 1 Sam. x. 5 ; after Samuel had anointed Saul king, he foretold to him what should occur on his way. One of the things that was to happen was thf i. he should meet a company of prophets coming down from the high place, with a psaltery, and a tabret, and a pipe, and a harp, before them ; and they shall prophecy," — (Compare also 2 Kings, iii. 15.) In course of time music became one of the luxuries in the palaces of kings. The first intimation of tliis we have in the reply of Barzillai the Gileadite to David, when invited to go with him to Jerusalem and partake of his royal hospitality, as a return for the great services he had rendered him, when ho was expelled from Jerusalem by Absalom. (See 2 Sam. xvii., 27, 28, 29.) The aged Barzillai replied : " I am this day four- score years old ; and can I discern between good and evil ? Can thy servant taste what I eat or what I drink ? Can I hear any more the voice of the singing men and the singing women ? Wherefore then should thy servant be yet a burden to my lord the king ?" — (2 Sam. xix. 35.) Again, allusion is made to it in Ecclesiastes ii. 8, where Solomon says : " I gathered me also silver and gold, and the peculiar treasures of kings and pro- vinces : I got me men singers and women singers, and the delights of the sons of men, musical instruments of all sorts." From the royal palaces music soon found its way also into ordinary convivial gatherings. In Isaiah's time it seems already to have been quite an established practice for those indulging in sti'ong drinks and wine to enliven 'jT^ir assemblies with music. Hence the prophet exclaims : "Woe unto those, that rise up early in the morning and follow strong drink ; Who continue until late in the evening, till wine inflame them. And the harp anil the lyre, tabret, and the pipe, and wiue are in their feasts ; Hut the work of the Lord they regard not, And the operations of His hands they do not perceive." (Isa. V. 11, 12.) But not only was music employed on festive occasions, but likewise entered the solemnities of mourning. When king Josiah was killed in the battle against Phai'aoh Necho, king of Egypt, it is recorded that "Jeremiah lamented for Josiah : and all the singing men and ringing women spake of Josiah in their lamentationH. ' — (2 CI on. xxxv. 25.) jam. xvu., HISTORY OF HEBREW LITERATURE. 197 It was, however, under David that song and music entered on an entirely new era, to him uncjuestionably belongs the honour of having brought the Lyric poetry of the Hebrews to perfection. Already as a youth he had evinced a passion for music and poetrj'. His skill on the harp procured him admit- tance to the presence of the King, a circumstance which must have greatly encouraged him to improve the musicnl talents with which he was so highly gifted. But having several times narrowly escaped, with his harp in his hand, the deadly spear which Saul hurled at him through jealousy, he fled into the wilderness of Judea, where he wandered for several 3'oars. There in the lonely desert, wandering from place to place, seeking a safe abode, his harp was his only comforter and friend. Its melodious tones assuaged his fears, and made him forgetful of envy and hatred. When afterwards brighter days smiled upon him, and the shepherd's staff" was exchanged for a sceptre, the haip still remained his companion in the royal palace, where he also continued to increase the poetry of the Hebrews. In the institution of the Tabernacle service by David, and afterwards the temple service by Solomon, music reached its height among the ancient Hebrews. In order to add greater solen)nity to the service of God, David divided the four thousand Levites into twenty-four companies, whose .special duty it was to attend in regular . ^ekly courses in succession at the Tabernacle, and t ,.ce charge of the musical portion of the service. See 1 Chron. xxi. 5, xxiii. 5, xxv. 1-31. Compare also 2 Chron. v. 12, 13. Each of these companies had its nSi'Q (menatsedch) leader, and to whom the Psalms were dedicated, as is stated in some of the titles. The courses col- lectively, as a united body, were superintended by three directors. After the building of the temple, Solomon con- tinued this arrangement, and which, with the exce[)tion of some temporary interruptions during the reign of idolatrous kings, was preserved until the final overthrow of Jerusalem. B:)th music and poetry greatly deteriorated after the i*eturn of the Jews from their long Babylonian captivity. The P.salms were accompanied some by dnng and some by wind instruments as indicated in the inscription.s of the Psalms. As for example Ps. iv. 1, "To the chief musician (or leader) over (Neginoth) the string instruments, a Psalm of David." Again Ps. V. 1, "To the chief musician over (Nechiloth) the wind nstruments, a Psalm of David." The reader will perceive, on refeiring to the English Bible, that in the inscriptions or titles of :.he Psalms, the Hebrew terms of the musical instruments are in all cases retained, and we must say, that the translators have acted very wisely in having done so, inasmuch as great obscurity 87 1' 1 ■ V ■] ' U ■I' ' -I ^1 • HI ■i I I- 198 HISTORY OF HEBREW LITl-JRATURE. I pi'evails as regards the proper iinpoit of .some of the terms employed in the inscriptions, arising no doubt from the imper- fect krio\vl(.'dgc we possess of the temple music. It was, there- foio, i'ar better to retain the original terms, than assume translations based merely upon conjecture. Thus, for exa?niile, the inscription of Psalm viii. reads, " To the chief musician over Gittith, a Psalm of David." Now it is altogether uncertain what the term fiiJTii Gittith really means, for even the derivMr tion of the word is doubtful. Some regard the term derived from f]^ (Gdtli) a wine 2)f'<-'ss, and suppose the instrument was so called because it was generally played at the time of making wine. But why this instrument should be pla^'ed just on that occasion is certainly not very easy to conceive. Others derive it fi-o;?! ^"y (Gath), a city of the Philistines, and assign as a reason thnt it may pi-obably have been invented there. That may or may not be the case. It is purely conjecture. Others again assume that it maj- be derived from the verb "vy^ {tnujan) to strike, to play, lience a string instrmnent. Now although we would not say that this derivation is altogether inadmissible, still we must say, that the form of the word is somewhat against it. Similar difficulties exist with some ot the other terms in the inscriptions. There are, however, others of which the moaning is perfectly clear. The term Jm2^5 Neginofh, in Pk. iv. 1, certainly means string instruments, and indicates that the singing of the P.salm >vas to be accompanied by string instruments, whilst the term fllbniD ^ecldlotli in Ps. v. 1 undoubtedly means wivd instru' merils, and indicates, that the singing of that Psalm was to bo accom]>anied by instruments of that kind. We take this opportunity of mentioning, that in our authoi • ized version, the titles or inscriptions are not included among the verses, whilst in the Hebrew Bil)le they always form the first verse, consequently in all the P.salms with titles, the verses do not correspond. As we aie always quoting from the original we are obliged for the convenience of the general reader, to give also the quotation according to the English version. There are other musical instruments mentioned in the Old Testament besides those we have described. In 1 Sam. x. v, mention is made of another string instrument called 533 (Nevel) the nablimn, or psaltery as it is called in the author- ized version. This instrument, like the harp, was much used by the ancient Hebrews, indeed the two instruments are fre- quently spoken of together. According to Ps. xxxiii. 2, and Ps. xliv. 9, it had ten strings ; but in Ps. xcii. 4, (Eng. vers. V. 3) the psaltery is mentioned as a different instrument to that of ten strings, and Josephus also speaks of the p.saltery HISTORY OF HEBREW LITERATURE. 199 as having twelve strings. (Antiq. vii. ch. x. par. 3.) But this is no discrepancy, but merely shows that the psaltery some- times had ten and sometimes twelve strings, and may sometimes even have had less or more, just as is the case with the keys of the modern flutes. Yet a flute is a flute, whether it has one, four, or eight keys. As to the shape of the psaltery, nothing can be gathered from Scripture ; but according to the testimony of Jerome and other ancient writers, it was of the form of an inverted Greek Delta A. In the title of Ps. liii. occurs an instrument called fibril's (Machalath), which, by Gesenius and others, is regarded to be a kind of lute or guitar. They were apparently influenced in forming their opinion by the similarity of the Hebrew to the Ethiopic word Maided, that is, a guitar. But the word is apparently derived from the Hebrew verb j'^n [chalal), i. e., to hore, to 'perforate, and denotes a kind of jlvte, which accords also with the opinion entertained by many ancient and modern writers. Among the musical instruments that were used at the dedication of Nebuchadnezzar's golden image f'see Dan. iii. 5,) there are two string instruments mentioned which do not. occur in any of the earlier books, namely, the O^iJii:? (Kith- aros, or Kaithros), and the i^32lD (Sabbacha). The former is the Kitharis of the Greeks, and was a kind of ha7'p, and the latter^ which was by the Greeks called sctinbuke, was like tlie necel of the Hebrews, of a triangular shape, and had, according to ancient writers, originally only four strings, which wi-re played with the fingers, but in course of time the number of strings were greatly increased. Whether the Chald*^ ms obtained these instruments from the Greeks, or vice V' 'sa, it is impossible to say. Of wind instruments there were also several kinds in use among the ancient Hebrews. We have alrea'ly mentioned the (uggav) flate or pipe invented by iFubal, and the silver trumpets, which were to be used for the calling of the nssembly. The horn, which, in the Hebrew Bible, is sometimes called IBl© (Shopkar), and sometimes "np (Keren), is very ancient. It was originally made of the horns of oxen or of rams, hence its name. In course of time it was made of brass, with a large bell-shaped ending, and gradually its f(n-m more ov less changed, but it still retains its name, f<)r the Italians call it corno, the Fi-ench cor, and we speak of it as the F ranch-horn Among the ancients the horns, in a large measure, supplied the place of our bells. The tinimpet, called in Hebr'^w niSlISn (Chatsotserah) was straight, and the mouth resembled a small l)ell : it was from 18 to 20 inches long. Such sti-aight trumpets were also used % y'^ :i: lu- •I" •I' C ■I „! 200 HISTORY OF HEBREW LITERATURE. among the Egyptians, and are often found depicted on the monuments. (See Wilkinson, 11, p. 260.) This trumpet was used in calling the people or the rulers together, and was then blown softly. It was also used in giving notice for the camp to move forward, or when the people were to march to war ; iji that case it was sounded with a deeper or stronger note. The i^bn (Ohalil) was a kind of flute or pipe. It occurs only five times in the Old Testament, and the passages throw no light whatever as to its form. If we, however, take those in use among the ancient Egyptians as our guide, they may be described as consisting of either a single straight tube differing sometimes in length, with the holes so low down that the player had to stretch his arms to the utmost ; or, consisting of two tubes of equal or unequal length, but having a common mouth -piece, played from the end like our hautboy. The tubes were called the right and left pipe, the latter having fewer holes and produced the base notes. This pipe is still much used in Palestine. The n''DSS?aiD {Suw.ponia) or i^iigiD {Siponia) was no doubt a kind of bag-pipe, which was also a very great favourite instrument among the Arabians and Egyptians who called it Sumara el Kurbe. In course of time it became also quite common in almost every country of Europe, where it still remains in use among the country people in some countries. The Greeks called it Sumphonia and the Italians Sambovga. In Psalm cl. 5, there is mention made of two kinds of cymbals, the one called n^lltl ''bsbs {Tsiltsele theruah) clanging cymbals which consisted of two flat metallic plates and were played just as they are now in modern bands. The other kind called y')2X0 ''S^bS {Tsiltseli shema) sounding cymbals, consisted of four small metallic plates about the size of a large button, two of these were attached to each hand, and the ladies, as they danced, marked *ime with them by striking them together. The castanets so much in use in Spain no doubt had their origin from these cymbals. They were intro- duced into Spain by the Moors, and as they were of the shape of chestnut shells, the Spaniards called them castanulas. In 2 Sam. vi. 4, we have a musical instrument mentioned n^3?D3?D>a ( Menaanim ) rendered in the English version "cornets," but Jerome, in his Latin version, rendered it by " sisLrn,7n" It is impossible to ascertain from Scripture what kind of instrument is denoted by it, but if the supposition of Jerome is correct, and there is no reason to doubt that it is, since the sistrum was a common instrument in use among the ancieii.t Egyptians, atid was especially employed by them in religious services rendered jo Isis, an Egyptian diety, and HISTORY OF HEBRFW LITEU.VTUBE. 201 according to some writers also to frighten away the evil spirit Typhon whom the Egyptians regarded as especially hostile to their country. Hence the sistrarn is often met with upon Egyptian sculptures. The instrument is not easy to describe. The nearest we can come to is, by representing it as an elong- ated horse shoe, having three or four movable bars across the centre, each bar being furnished with three or four rings of metal. The instrument had a highly ornamental handle by which it was held upright and shaken, and as the rings moved to and fro on the centre bars gingling sounds were produced. Wilkinson says, " it was generally from about eight to sixteen or eighteen inches in length, and was entirely made of bronze or brass," {WiUcinaon'a Manners and Customs of the Ancient Egyptians, vol. 2 p. 323.) We may add also, that the deriva- tion of the Hebrew name likewise favours the supposition that it denotes a kind of sistram since it is derived from the verb 5^5 {nua) to move, to shake, and was so called from the mode in which the instrument was played. There are several instruments of this kind in the British Museum, one of which is of great antiquity. It was found at Thebes, and brought to England by Mr. Burton. In 1 Sam. xviii. 6, we have in connection with tabrets an instrument mentioned called l52J15btr {Shalishim) which, from the derivation of the name, apparently is the triangle, after- wards introduced into Turkish music, and in course of time into the bands throughout Europe. It is greatly to be regretted that we have no means of ascer- taining what style of music was in vogue among the ancient Hebrews, we have even but few musical notations still extant, and these throw but very little light upon the subject. In treat- ing on the few notations that have came to us, the term nbD {Selali) claims our first notice. This term occurs seVenty-one times in the Psalms and three times in the prayer of Habbakuk. We may safely say, there is no other word in the wide field of philology which has been explained in so many different ways by diflferent writers. Some of the definitions are very ingenious, Aquila rendered it by ahviys ; Symmachus by in eternity, in the Targum it is rendered by from eternity to eternity, but Rosenmiiller has very properly remarked that these renderings would be quite unsuitable in many places. See {Scholia Ps. Tom. i. p. lix.) Take for example Ps. Ixxx. 8 (Eng. vers. v. 7), " I proved thee at the waters of Meribah, Selah." To render it here by always, or in eternity, would hardly be suitable to the context. The acute Rabbinic writer, Aben Esra, supposed it denoted so it is in truth, whilst Augusti, in his introduction to the Psalms p. 125, supposes that it was «quivalent to Halleluiah. But these writers have not shown \',A 1 m H^^ 1 i! ill 202 IIISTOIIY OF HEBREW LITERATURE. how they ohtained these meanings, and they are evidently mere conjectures. Bi.it by far the greatest portion of critics have regarded the word as a musical^ notation, differing only in this respect, that whilst some take the word to be composed of the initial let- ters of three words, others look upon the word as a musical sign of itself. Those who hold the former opinion say, it con- tains either the initial letters of blDH tll^'Ob V2'''D {Siman Lishiioth Hakkol), a si^n to change the voice, or the initials of "TflJn nb^^b iO {^0 Lcmaalah Hash-shar) i. e. return to the beginning of the song, which would be equivalent to our modern musical notation, da capo. Whilst we must admire the ingenuity displayed in these interpretations, we are bound to state that they are not based upon any solid grounds ; indeed, the forming of words from initial letters is altogether foreign to the Hebrew Scriptures, although such words are sometimes met with in later Hebrew writings. The celebrated grammarian and commentator Rabhi David Kimchi, who flourished in the 13th century, supposed it indicated an elevation of the voice, deriving it from the verb biJD isaial), to raiie, to lift up. (See his Lexicon entitled tJi'Cl'©, {Shorashim, i. e., roots.) And this opinion has been espoused by many critics of the present century. Herder thinks that Selah, which, according to him, occurs only in pathetic songs, stands in places where a change in the emotion is to be indicated as a nota bene for the singers It indicates, he remarks, " neither a pause, nor da capo, nor an intermeszio, but a change in the style of singing, either in the gradual elevation of the voice or in the time. And in a note he adds, it is evident, from all accounts of travellers, that the Orientals love a simple, and what appears to Europeans a melancholy, style of music, and that at certain places they often suddenly change the time, and pass into another melody, and this was probably the case wherever the word Selah occurs in the Psalms. Forkel in his History of Music, p.l44, expresses similar views ; he, however, favours the supposition that it rather indicates "a change of time, than a change of voice." DeWette, in his Commentary on the Psalms, considers that it marks an elevation of the voice, and a change of time, or a repetition of the melody in a higher tone. However, manv of the most eminent modern writers take the term Selah to indicate merely 9^. pause, where the singers were to stop whilst the music played an interlude ; and this sup- position certainly does not rest on mere conjecture, but the derivation of the word itself favoura this hypothesis, for it is apparently derived from the verb nbO {salah), synonymous HISTORY OF HKIUIEW LITERATURE. 203 regarded it as denoting some kind of but such a meanini; avouM certainly not with tibXD (sha/a/i), to be quiet, to rest, like the corresponding Syriac verb (sh'lo), to rest, to pause. The rendering in the Septuagint by diapsalma, i. j I 115 i: : }\ \ . \ .J I 204 HISTORY OF HEBREW LITERATURE. also by Bochart, a learned divine, and well known over the world by his writings, but, especially by his celebrated work Hiei'ozoicon, or Scripture Zoology, to which he had devoted a great part of his life ; and by Eichhorn, Rosemliller, Geseniiis, and many others. Yet we cannot well see how this explanation is to be reconciled with the mentioning of " the chief musician who is always spoken of as leader of the choir and musical instruments, but who could hardly be said, to be a presidcr over a Psalm to be sting after some other melody. We have, therefore, with all due deference to the authorities above mentioned always held the opinion, that the term in question was the name given to the company of Levites who performeil the musical portion at the mornins^ service in the temple. We will here state our reasons for adopting this opinion, and leavc* it to the reader to judge as to its probability. It is well known that the morning service in the temple began with the dawn, and that the sacrifice was offered immediately at sunrise. The seven gates of the court of Israel were then opened, and on the opening of the last the .silver t'.umpHts sounded a flourish, to call the Levites to their desks for the performance of the musical portion, and the stationary men to their appointed places as the repre- sentatives of the people. The opening of the folding doois of the temple was the established signal for killing the sacrifice. Now, the sun is evidently here poetically called the hind, just as the Arabian poets constantly call the sun the gazelle, no doubt on account of the great lustre and soft expression of the eyes for which this animal is so celebrated. " The morning hind" is therefore only a figurative expression for the rising sun, and hence a very suitable epithet ff)r thi? company of musicians attending at the morning sacrifice at sunrise. The psalm, too, is a very appropriate one to be sung at the offering cf the morning sacrifice ; indeed, there is direct allusion made to public service and sacrifice : I will declare thy name to my brethren : In the midst of the congregation I will praise thee. V. 23 ; Bng. vers. v. 22. Of thee ihall be my praise in the great congregation ; My vows 1 will pay before those fearing thee. The poor shall eat, and shall be satisfied ; , They shall praise the Loan that seek him ; Your heart shall live for ever- Vs. 26, 27 ; Bng. vers. 26, 26. The mentioning of the " poor shall eat," in connection witli ** Of thee my praise shall be in the great congregation," in the HISTORY OF HEBREW LITERATURE. 205 preceding verse evidently indicates that it refers to the sacri- ticial feast which took place at the offering of peace-oiferings. Those sacrifices, which were entirely voluntary, and were offered in returning thanks for some benefits vouchsafed, or in asking for some favour, or merely as an act of piety, differed from the burnt offerings which were entirely burnt, and from the sin offerings, which were partly burnt, whilst the officiating priest obtained a portion of them, inasmuch as of the peace-offerings only the blood was poured upon the altar, and the fat only was burnt, whilst the bi'east and the right shoul- der went to the priest, and the remainder belonged to the party who made the offering, and who feasted upon it witii his family, his friends, and such as he wished to invite. This custom is very ancient, since we find it already prac- tised by Jethro, as recorded in Exod. xviii. l2 : " And Jethro Moses's father-in-law, took a burnt offering and sacrifices for God : and Aaron came, and all the elders of Israel, to eat bread with Moses's father-in-law before God." In Deut. xvii. II, it is even enjoined that the poor shall be invited to those feasts. "And thou shalt rejoice before the Lord thy God, thou, and thy son, and thy daughter, and thy manservant, and thy maidservant, and the Levite that is within thy gates, and the stranger, and the fatherless, and the widow, that aie among you, in the place which the Lord thy God hath chosen to place his name there." We feel assured that the reader, after duly considering the foregoing remarks, will agree with us that the poetic epithet, " the hind of the morning," is quite a suitable appellation of the company of Levites who performed the musical service at the morning sacrifices, and that the opinion we have above expressed is not formed on mere conjecture. In treating on music, we must not omit to state, that in national and religious celebrations the women also took part in the performance of it. We have already had occasion to allude to Miriam, who, with the women of Israel, took part in singing the triumphal song after the miraculous deliverance from the Egyptians at the Red Sea. On a certain occasion, on the removing of the Ark, according to Psalms Ixviii. 26, (Eng. vers. 25) women also took part in the solemn procession playing on timbrels : I ! " The singers went before, after tliem the players on instruments ; Among them were damsels playing with timbrels." On the occasion of David returning from the victor}'^ he had gained over the Philistines, the implacable enemies of the Israelites, the women of all the cities of Israel came out to 28 206 HISTOllY OF HKIIKKW LITMraTURK. meet King Haul, singing and dancing, and with instruments of music. " And tlio women answerutl one another an thoy played, and said, Saul hatli slain hm tlidusaiulH, But David his ten tliouHaiida," 1 Saui, xviii. 7. Among the returning captives, from Babylon brought back by Ezra, according to his enumeration there were two hundred singing men and singing women, which shows that even during their long captivity thoy had not altogether neglected music, although at times they hung up their harps on the willows, and refused to sing the songs of their native country n a foreign land. The playing on instruments and the singing was often accompanied by dancing on festive occasions, and even in sacred worship. Miriam and the women of Israel danced whilst they played on the timbrels and sang, (Exod. xv. 20.) In Psalm cxlix. 8, the Psalmist says, ti " Let tliem praise liis iiame in the daiico ; Let tliem .sing praises to hiin witli the timbrel and harp-" Even David himself did not think it beneath his royal dignity to " dance with all his might before the ark whilst removing it into the city of David." 2 Sam. vi. 14. In later times it appears in order to make the religious ceremonies more imposing new practices were introduced and among them there is mention made in the Mishna* of a torch- light dance with song and music which took place in the Court of Women on the first evening of the Feast of Tabernacle, see Tract. Succah ch. v. 2-4, although later Rabbinic writers speak of its having been repeated during the whole of the seven evenings of the festival. The statement in the Mishna is far more trustworthy, as its authors lived so much nearer the time when the ceremony was yet performed. We will here take the opportunity of offering a few brief remarks on the different Courts of the Temple. The Court of Women, sometimes also called the new court (2 Chron. xx. 5), and the outer court (Ezek. xlvi. 21), was so called not as its name would imply that none but women were permitted to enter, but because it was the regular appointed place of worship, beyond which they were not permitted to go except when they brought a sacrifice, in which case they went forward to the Court of Israel. The Court of Women was A full deocriptiou of this Babbiuic work will be given hereafter. HISTORY OF IIF.nUEW LITERATURE. 207 entered from the Court of the Gentiles, (wliich wa:^ the outer court, and into which persons of all nations were permitted to enter,) hy the gate called ilw heaatiful, it was of marvellous workmanship, its folding doors, lintel, and side-posts bein;^^ overlaid with Corinthian brass. The court itself was 135 cubits square, which according to the nacred cubit of twenty- one inches would give a dimension of 2.'iG feet three inches, whilst according to the common ctihit of eighteen inclies it would be 202 feet six inches square. There was a gate on each side, and on three of its sides were piazz'is with galleries above them, from whence could be seen what was going on in the spacious court. In each corner of this court, there was a room, each set apart for a special purpose. (See Ezek. xlvi. 21-24.) The first was appropriated to the purification of the lepers after they were healed. In tlie second the wood for tlie sacrifices was laid up. The third Avas set apart for the Nazarities, where they shaved their heads and prepared their oblations. And in the fourth the wine ami oil useil for sacrifice were stored. There were besides two additional rooms, in which the Levites kept their musical instruments, and in whicli were also kept thirteen treasure chests, two of which were for the depositing of the half shekel which was paid 3'early by every Isi'aelite, in the others the money was kept which was used for the purchase of sacrifices, kc. The Court of Israel. — The Court of Israelites was separ- ated from the Court of Women by a wall of 32 i cubits high on one side and 2.5 on the other. The difference in the height of the wall arose from the- rock on which the temple stood becoming higher on advancing westward, hence the difi"erent courts become tlevatad in proportion. The ascent into this court, it is said, was made by a flight of fifteen steps of a semicircular form, and according to some of the Rabbinic writers it was upon these steps that the fifteen Psalms, namely from 120th to 184th inclusive, of which each bears the title tTib3??an T^tl? {Shir Hammadloth) i.e., a song of ascending^, rendered in the English version " a song of degrees," were sung by the Levites. But there is Tiot the slightest proof of there having just been fifteen steps, and it is now generally believed, that the pre- cise number fifteen is only the oflCspring of the feitile imagina- tion of those Rabbinic writei's suggested by the fifteen Psalms of degrees. A widely prevailing, and certainly more reasonable opinion among critics is, that these psalms were called "songs ofnscend- ings" because they were either sung on the occasions of the three yearly jouineys of the tribes when going up to Jerusalem to bring their oflferings, or by the returning Israelites- \% i ' i ' ' 'li ' I ■. ' 20H HISTORY OP HEBREW LITERATURE. from thoir long Babylonian captivity. The former supposition is certainly very plausible for it was customery in speaking of going to the Holy Land or to Jerusalem as going up to titein. Furthermore, there is a direct allusion made to these yearly pilgrimages of the tribes to Jerusalem in Psalm exxiii S. 4. Jernsalein, the well-built, Like a city that iH compacted together. Thither tiie trihes no up, The tribes of the Lohu, According to an oriliiiance in Israel, To give praise to the name of the Lord. And in Psalms xlii. 5 (Eng. vers. v. 4), and Isa. xxx. 29, mention is made of these pilgrimages being attended with songs of praise. Taking, therefore, all these circumstances into consideration, we may safely conclude that the fifteen psalms were called songs of ascendings from their being sung by the tribes on these yearly pilgrimages to the holy city. Gesenius, and after him DeWette and some few other critics, have indeed taken objection to this explanation, on the mere ground that a few of the psalms are rather of a melancholy nature, and, therefore, unsuitable for such joyous occasions, and have favoured the supposition, that the title, " song of ascendings," or " degrees," has reference rather to some peculiar style existing in the composition of some of the psalms, namely, a gradual rising in the sentiment, as, for example : I will lift up my eyes to the hilU, From whence cometh my help. My help is from the Ldku, Maker of heaven and earth. Ps. cxxi. 1,2. But this style does by no means uniformly prevail through- out the fifteen psalms ; besides, it is exceedingly common in all poetical writings of Scripture, and especially in the Psalms and Proverbs. The entire length of the Court of the Israelites from east to west was 187 cubits, or 327 feet 3 inches, according to the sacred cubit of 21 inches, whilst its breadth from north to south was 135 cubits, or 236 feet 3 inches. This court was, however, divided into two parts, one of which formed the Courl of the Israelites, and the other the Court of the P riests. The former was a kind of piazza, which surrounded the latter, and under which the people stood whilst their sac- rifices were burning in the Court of the Priests. It had no less than thirteen gates, with chamber's about them, each chamber having a special name, and was set apart for a special purpose. The space taken up by the Court of the Priests was 165 cubits, or 288 feet 9 inches in length, and 1 i. 1, 2. id riests. the HISTORY OF III . KW LITERATUUK. 209 119 cubits, or 208 feet 3 inche.-* kvide, and was raised 2i cubits, or 3 feet 7 inches above the surrounding court, from which it was sepnrnted Vjy the pillars which supported the piazza, and the railing, which was placed between them. It was within the (,'ourt of Priests that the altar stood upon which the sac- rifices were consumed, and the molten sea, in which the priests washed ; and hero, likewise, were the ten brazen lavers for wa' the sacrifices, and the various utensils and instru- me. lor sacrificing, which the reader will find enumerated in 2 \Jhron. iv. Into this court the Israelites were only per- mitted to enter on three occasions, namely, when they had to lay hands on the animals which they offered for a nin offering, or when they had to kill them, or when they had to wave a part of them, as was the case in off'ering a peace or thanks* offering ; on such occtc.ions, before the portions which were to be offered were committed to the fire ot the altar, the priests Eut them in the hands of the offerer, who lifted them up on igh, and waved towards the four quarters of the globe, the priest supporting and directing his hands. When entering this court they generally did so on the north or south side, according to the side on which the sacrifice was to be slain, but fls a general rule they never left the court by the same doo»- ' which they had entered. 1 the Court of the Priests, the assent to the temple itseu ..as by a flight of twelve steps, each being half a cubit in height, which led to what is called the sacred porch, .vhich was 20 cubits long, and at the entrance of which stood the two pillars called Jachin and Boaz, which were 23 cubits high, and could be seen by those standing in the courts imme- diately before it. The architectural proportions of the tem-* pie were 60 cubits long, 20 cubits wide, and 30 cubits high, The internal dimensions of the " holy " were 40 cubits long, 20 cubits wide, and 30 cubits high. The " holy of holies " was situated on the western extremity of the entire building, and its internal dimensions formed a cube of 20 cubits. From the descriptions of the temple, it appears that the " holy of holies " was an adytum without any window. It is very probable that Solomon refers to this fact when he said, " The Lord said that he would dwell in the thick darkness." (1 Kings viii. 12.) The " holy of holies" was separated from the " holy" by a par- tition, in which was a large opening for an entrance, which was, however, closed by a suspended curtain. In Levit. xix. 30, there is a general command given, " Ye shall keep my Sabbaths, and reverence my sanctuary ;" and in other places there are certain prohibitions laid down, in refer- ence to the sanctity of the house of God ; but in course of time in order to ensure a more strict reverence for the temple, the il m i ? ■' '1 111 II ; It ■i ,1 II ■ '! ■ m\ i « . \. i; I \ 510 HISTORY OF HEBREW LITERATURE. Sanhedrim promulgated certain prohibitions which were not mentioned in the Mosaic code. These are still preserved in the Rabbinical writings, a few of which we will here subjoin for the benefit of the reader. 1. " No one shall enter the mountain of the house with his staff." This prohibition does however not include the lame who require a staff for supjiort. 2. " No one shall enter with his shoes on his feet," thouo-h he is permitted to enter with sandals. There are direct {proofs that it was the custom in remotest antiquity to approach barefoot the sacred spot where the Deity was believed to be present. In Exod. iii. 4, 5, we are told, when the Lord saw that Moses went to see why the bush is not burned, He called to him, and said, "Appioach not hither; put off thy shoes from thy feet, for the place whereon thou standest is holy ground." Again, in Joshua v. 15, it is recorded, that the angel which appeared to Joshua, in a similar manner commanded him, " Loose thy shoe from off thy foot, for the place whereon thou standest is holy." It is the prevailing opinion that the i)riests performed their sacred duties in the temple unshod ; and even now it is eustotnarv amoncj the Hebrews whose forms of worship have not been modernized, to take off their shoes on their most solemn of nil festivals, the day of atonement. The Mohammedans are likewise not permitted to enter a mosque with their shoes on. Jainieson says : " The lobby of their mosques is filled with shoes, just as the lobby of a house, or recess of a church, is filled Avith hats amongst us." (Paxtov's Illustrations, I p. 298, note). I'hey have, no doubt adopted this practice imong others from the Hebrews. It is, however somewhat curious to find that Pythagoras the founder of the Italic School of Philosophy, v.iio floui-ished about 550 — 505 B. C, should also have enjoined on his discipies to enter the temple and to sacrifice unshod. It is, most likely Pythagoras adopted the custom from the I^gyptians, whose country he had visited during his extensive travels. This custom, will at first sight appear somewhat extraordinaiy, and yet, it was in reality a common practice prevailing in the ordinary intercourse of life among the ancient nations. In the east, shoes are seldom worn in the apartments in paying visits, but, are generally taken off in an ante-chamber. 3 " No one shall enter the mountain of the house with his scrip on." The scrip being used as a convenience in transacting ordinary business, it was not suitable to be brought into the house of God. 4 " No one may enter with the dust on his feet." It was quite a common practice before entering any private dwelling to wash or wipe the feet, hence we find it was the first act of attention which was paid to strangers in conferring' hospitality. (Comp. Gen. xviii. 4, xix. 2. Judg. xix. 21. Hom. Od. iv. 49). The com- mi\ !» ffl Mnmon HISTORY OF HEBREW LITERATURE. Jll nion practice of wearing sandals which merely protected the soles, rendered the washing of the feet peculiarly refreshing, since they soon become parched and covered wit'Ji tine dust. The office was generally porfornied by the servants, and, there- fore, when Abraham and Lot, in the two first passages above quoted made use of the expression, " and wash your feet," it means and have them luashed, not that the guests were to do it themselves. 5 " Neither shall any one enter with money in his purse." The carrying of a purse with money in it, implies ordinary business transactions, and, therefore, it was not deemed proper to bring it into the place of worship, where all worldly thoughts and affections should be shaken off. " It is however permitted to bring such money as is requii'ed for the purchase of sacrifices and for other purposes, in the hand." 6 " It is not permitted to use any irreverent jestures, especially before the gate of Niconor." This gate was exactly in front of the temple. 7 " No one i.s permitted to make the mountain of the house a thoroughfare." 8 " He that enters the court, must go leisurely and gravely to his place, and whilst there he must demean himself as in the presence of the Lord God, m all reverence and fear." 9 " lie must worship standing, with his feet close together, his eyes directed to the ground, and his hands upon his breast." 10 " No one, however weary, is per- mitted to sit down in the court." There was, however, an exception made in favour of the kings of the house of David. 11 " It is not permitted to pray with the head uncovered." This rule has always been observed by the Hebrews to this day, except among some congregations who w^ithin the present century introduced many reforms into their services. 12 " On leaving it is not permitted to turn the back upon the altar." To avoid 1)reaking this rule, they walked backward until they were out of the court. Dancing. — The Hebrew term for the rhincc is bin)2 (Machol), and is derived from the verb ^in (chul), to twist, to turn, and as the derivation of the word indicates, the dance of the ancient Hebrews apparently consisted merely of gesticulations made with the hands and feet, the dancers often moving in a circle, as is still the custom in the East. According to the descrip- tion of Eastern travellers, an expert lady dancer leads the dance, making all kinds of steps and gestures yet keeping time to the notes of the timbrels, the other dancers following in a circle, and imitating their leader as nearly as possible. Some writers have discovered this custom of a leader of the dance, in the case of Miriam, " who took a timbrel in her hand, and all the women went out after her with timbrels and with dances." We may take it for granted that the danc- ti I . i 212 HISTOET OF HEBREW LITERATURE. ing mentioned in Scripture was altogether free of unseemly movements and indecorous actions, differing in this respect widely from the dancing as now practised among the modern orientals, or they would not have been tolerated by the holy men, much less permitted to form a part in religious ceremo- nies. There is not a single example to be found of men and women dancing together. In Judg, xxi. 21, there is only mention made of female dancers, and certainly the Benjam- ites who lay in ambush for them would not have had such an easy task of carrying off" the daughters of Shiloh, who came out dancing on a certain feast, if each had had a male com- panio:) in the danc-*. Although oriental dances seem not to have had regular figures such as exist in modern dances, yet they were apppa- rently not devoid of art, for Lady Montague, who accompanied her husband in his embassy to Constantinople, declared that she could never play the part of the leader of the dancers. T'^are is no indication in the Scriptures of the existence of public dancers such as are now very common in Eastein countries, or that women danced for amusement in the pres- ence of men. The dancing of the daughter of Herodias before company, may be taken as an example of the evil influence which the introduction of Grecian customs had exercised. Among the Mohammedans dancing is looked upon as an amusement quite beneath the dignity of a man, and therefore men hardly ever take part in it, but is left alto- gether to the women. Among the Greeks, however, where dancing formed a kind of mimic representation of the com- mon actions of life, and frequently even of deeds of war, it was admitted among the gymnastic sports. As we have just been noticing the circumstance of women being permitted in taking a prominent part in religious and patriotic ceremonies, we may take here the opportunity of referring to a subject which has been enlisted by some modein Biblical critics in their endeavours to impugn the veracity of the Mosaic narrative. We allude to that part of the sacred narrative where Joseph is represented in having come into contact with Potiphar's wife, recorded in Gen. xxxix. Our adverse critics maintain, that from the well-known strict seclusion of Oriental women in their harems, and the great care that is exercised in guarding those places, it was impossible for Joseph to have thus fallen in with his master's wife, as is stated in the narrative. Now this is by no means the only error into which those critics have fallen by not sufficiently distinguishing between the prevailing ancient and modern customs. We all k lOW from modern history, and indeed from experience, how ^nan- 1 HISTORY OF HEBREW LITERATURE. 21.^ ners and customs ai'e liable to change, and, therefore, iio critic would think himself justified in criticising the writings of Shakespeare by the customs and state of society as existing at the present time, and in like manner, it must be conceded, that it is highly unreasonable on tlie part of Biblical critics to take the rules of modern society as a guide in their expositions of Scripture. Now every ordinary reader of the Bible must have dis- covered that from the beginning to the end there is not a single incident recorded which would indicate the existence of such a custom of excluding women in their harems as is now commonly practised among orientals, but on the contrary are constantly spoken of as enjoying perfect freedom, and as we have seen even took part in some of the public and religious ceremonials. Among the Chaldeans also it appears from Dan. v. 2, 3, that women were not excluded from the society of men, but were permitted to sit with them in the banqueting hall. But it may of course be urged, that the non-existence of such a custom among the Hebrews and Chaldeans does by no means prove that it did not prevail among the Egyptians, it will, therefore, be incumbent on us to show that although it is now a deeply rooted custom among them, it was not so in ancient times. The testimony which we are able to adduce is of the most unquestionable kind, for it is the direct testimony of the ancient Egyptians themselves, who, although more than three thousand years have passed away, still speak to us through their monuments, and testif}' that the women in Egypt enjoyed even greater freedom than the women in Gi'eece. Taylor says ; " In some entertainments, we find the ladies and gentlemen 3f a party in diffc rent rooms ; but in others, we find them in the same apartment, mingling together with all the social freedom of modern Europeans. The chil- dren were allowed the same liberty as the women, instead of being shut up in the harem, as is now usual in the east, they were introduced into company and were permitted to sit by the mother or on the father's knee." (Taylor's Illustrations of the Biblt from the monuments of Egyjjt, p. 171.) On a monument from Thebes, and now in the British Museum, there is depicted a party of guests entertained with music and the dance. Men and women are seen seated together at the feast; there is another group of women sing- ing and clapping their hands to the sound of the double pipe ; and besides these there are two dancing girls. On another monument from Thebes, and now also in the British Museum, is depicted an Egyptian dinner. There we see a maid-servant presenting a cup of wine to a lady and gen- I :♦ I ■\ : I i 1 t 214 HISTORY OF HEBRKW H;rEUATlTaE. tleinan seated on chairs ; another hoUlinj^ a vase of ointment and a garland before other guests, and another female attend- ant offers wine to another guest, in her left hand is a napkin, for wiping the mouth after drinking. The table.'i' are fur- nished with b ead, meat, geese, and other birds, figs, baskets of grapes, flowers, and other things. Beneath the tables are seen glass bottles of wine. Wood-cuts of the monuments above referred to, are given by Wilkinson in his work ent- iled, " Manners and Customs of the Ancient Egyptians," in the second volume, pages 390 and 393. Tn speaking of a party, Wilkinson also observes, " At an Egyptian party, the men and women were frequently entertained separately in a different part of the same room, at the upper end of which the master and mistress of the house sat close together on two chairs, or on a large fauteuil ; each guest, as he arrived, presented himself to receive their congratuLitoiy welcome, and the musicians and dancers, hired for the occasion, did obeisance before them previous to the performance on their part. To the leg of the fauteuil a favourite monkey, a dog, gazelle, or some other pet animal was tied, and a young cliild was permitted to sit on the ground at the side of its mother, or on the fathei's knee. In some instances we find men and women sitting together, both strangers, as well as members of the fame family, a privilege not conceded to females among the Greeks, except with their relatives. And this not only argues the very great advancement in civilization, especially in an Eastern nation, but proves, like many other Egyptian customs, how far this people excelled the Greeks in the habits of social life." (Vol. II. pp. 38S, 389.) So much, then, regard- ing the objection raised by modern critics in respect to the impossibility of Joseph being able to come into contact with his master's wife according to Eastern customs. As regards the conduct of Potiphar's wife, as recorded in the Biblical nanative, the account given by Herodotus (2. 111.) in reference to the great corruption of manners that existed among the Egj'ptians in their marriage relation, plainly shows how very natural the narrative is. The wife of one of their oldest kings was unfaithful to him. The above remarks will sufficiently show how careful pei- sons should be in this age of much lecturing, and of still more writing, in allowing themselves to be influenced by any arguments they may read or hear advanced to impugn the truthfulness of any Biblical account. The arguments m all cases are put forward in the most convincing manner, so that those who are not able to controvert them are in great danger of being carried away by them. Persons hearing or reading such arguments should therefore always m HISTORY OF HEBREW LITERATURE. 215 einleavour to find out whether there is no possibility' of recon- ciling the apparent discrepancies. The objection raised against the portion of the nai-rative representing Joseph as being able so easily to fall in with his master's wife, would no doubt, by most readers be regaided as a very plausible objection, for taking in consideration the present custom in the east such an occurrence would be highly improbable if not indeed impos- sible. And when we see this objection brought forward by such men as Von Bohlen, Tuch, and many other writers of eminence we can hardly wonder that many should be influ- enced, and yet it will be seen how completely the truthfulness of the narrative may be sustained. We have now so far endeavoured to trace the state of learn- ing among the ancient Israelites, as far as it could be gathered from the Old Testament writings, which are the only sources from which such information can be obtained. We will, in the next place, proceed a step further, and enquire into the school system that prevailed among them, and the various studies that were pursued in them. III iV '■ ir )rded in (2.111.) existed ' shows of their :ul per- of still need by impugn lents in manner, enx are Persons always Schools. — Now although we find no special mention made in Scripture of the existence of any schools before the time of the Babylonian captivity, it is yet quite evident, that the whole tribe of Levi, besides being set apart for the service of the sanctuary, was also charged with the instruction^of the people, for Moses in his blessings of the tribes, .says of Levi, " They shall teach Jacob thy judgments, and Israel thy law J: they shall put incense before thee, and whole burnt .sacrifice upon thine altar." Deut. xxxiii. 1 0. Accordingly we find king J'^hoshaphat, in the third year of his reign, sending Levites into the JHen of Judah to teach. (See 2 Chron. xvii. 7, 8.) Being thus set apart as the regular in- structors of the people, they gained for themselves great respect among the nation, which in course of time gradually deepened into veneration. The reader will remember, when the patinavch Jacob pro- nounced his prophetic blessings of the tribes, (Genesis xlix.) on account of the cruel action of Simeon and Levi in the affair of the Shechemites, when they slaughtered all the male inhabi- tants and took their wives and little ones captives, and seized every thing that belonged to them : the pious patriarch uttered the momentous declaration : " Cursed be their anger for it was fierce. Ami their wrath, for it was cruel : I will divide tliem in Jacob, I will scatter them in Israel- " (v. T.) 216 HISTORY OF HEBREW LITERATURE. ' This prediction was literally fulfilled in the division of Pales- tine, foi' the Levitcs had no tract of land assigned to them, but forty-eight cities scjitteied among the other tribes were sol apart for iheni, thirteen of wliich, however belonged exclu- sively to tiie priests. Dwelling thus among the people they coidd more conveniently follow their occupation of teaching : and although we possess no positive information as to the precise mode adopted by them, we may yet safely conclude, that the teaching ot the youth in phices set apart for that purpose formed a part of their duties. Of the schools of the 'prophets or as the German writers call them Prophetenverein i.e., unions or societies of prophets, we have also no particular accounts, they are only incidentally alluded to without affording any infoi-mation as to the studies pursued in them. According to the Rabbles they were schools where the higlier branches were studied, special attention being paid to the study of theology. This opinion was espoused also by some modern writers. We do not know where the Rabbles obtained their informa- tion, unless it was from tradition, still we think the suposition is at least very reasonable, from the fact that we know, that they were presided over by prophets. The founding of the schools of prophets is ascribed to Samuel, and certainly the first indication of their existence is given in 1 Samuel x. b. Later these institutions obtained a more solid organization under the fostering care of the prophets Elijah and Elisha. After the return from the Babylonian captivity, the prophet Ezra lost no time in revising and arranging the books of the Old Testament. In this work according to the best Rabbinic authorities he was assisted by a chosen number of learned men who performed their work under his direct supervision. Some of the Rabbles give the number of men who were employed in the work as one hundred and twenty. But be that as it may, all Jewish wi-iters are agreed that Ezra collected the sacred writings and formed the present canon, and having thus been instrumental under Divine guidance in preserving the sacred Scriptures they hold him in equal veneration with Moses. {See Talraud, treatise Sanhedrim, p. 21.) But not only did Ezia diligently set to work in revising and arranging the books of the Hebrew Scriptures, but he likewise set his heart upon having Israel instructed in the statutes and judgments. (See Ezra vii. 10.) Hence we find from this time onward frequently mention made oi C^nSio {Sopherim) liter- ally scribes, but the tei-m is commonly used in a more general sense of /earned or literary men. The most famous and certainly the most esteemed of these was Simeon, surnamed the Just, who became high prie.st and head of the great HISTOllY OF HEIJUEW LITliRATURE. 217 assembly (Synagogue magna) about 302 B.C. This assembly consisted of one hundred and twenty members who were always selected for their piety and learning : and is said to have been first constituted by Ezra. Simon is frecjueiitly mentioned in the Talmud, and some of his sayings are still prt3served in the £11155 ""DIS (i^ti'J^'G Acoth) the Ethics of (the Jewish) Fathers. The following is a translation of one of them : " Upon three things," he said, "the world is founded," {i.e. the stability of society), " upon the law, religious worship, and acts of benevolence." (Firke Avoth, i. 2). At the death of Simon which took place after he had dis- charged the office of high-priest for nine years, Antigonus of Socoh OTie of his disciples succeeded him in the post of chief teacher. ITe was a highly learned and pious man, and whilst his master in his teaching strove to inculcate the principles upon which " the stability of society " depends, Antigonus wont a .step further in his teaching by impressing upon his disciples that every action of man should be performed upon purely conscientious principles, free from all selfish motives. " Be not," was his favourite saying, "like servants who .serve the master for a reward, but rather like servants who serve the master without regai I to reward, as a pure act of in)}>}i n was held by the ancient Hebrews may be formed from the hi^^h panegyric bestowed upon it by Jesus, the so^i of Sirach, in Ecclesiasticus, of which he claims to be the author : " I (wifidain) came out of the ruoutli uf Uie Most High, And like a uiist I covered tlie earth Upon liigli places 1 found my dwelling, .' And my throne is on a cloudy pilliir. 1 ulone compassed the circuit of heuven, And walkeg- vers, " ;ill the Synagogues. ') — Pm. Ixxiv. 8 For Moses of ohl time hatli in every city tht-m tliat pri'aeh liini, Ix'ing read in tlie synag()gu«!s every Sabbath da}'. (Acts XV. 21.) Leydekktr, a well known writer, and one of the most persist- ent upholdei's (;f tlie great anti([uity of tlie synagogui-s, observes : " The Sabbaths and festivals could not have been observed throughout the land without 8vnae added the (|uantiU- of ltraH.s or copper, the rich and costly embroidered cui'tnins and canopies, the shittim all rriinjous rites seem to have been suspended; in fact, during' the whole of this period the luition on account of their rebellious conduct at Kadesh, when the sj)ies retui'ued, was apparently re;;;triled as under a temporary rejection by (Jod, and Wiis even pi'oliiliited from performing the rite of circumci'^ion (see Josh. v. 2, o, G,) which was the sljj^n of the covenant, and which, under other eircumstancc^s, could not be nei^dected on the [)ain of (leath. When, howevei', they had taken jKJs.session of the land of Canaan, it is e\ ident thnt one place of worship, no matter how central its position, would have been alto;,rether insuflicieut, as only those who lived in its neii^hbourlujod could have les-rtcd to it for daily or even weekly service. It is true, that on the three j^reat festivals, namely, the Passover, Penti^cost, and tlie feast of J'abeniaclcs, all the adults of the nation were oblij^ed to present themselves with their otierin<,'s at the Tabernacle, and after the buildinjj; of the Temple in that sanctua'y, still it is hardly reasonal>le to suppose that this constituted the entire public worship of the Jews, and that no other religious st'i'vicos were observed during the months that intervened between the three great festivals. Besides the ivornen who were not obligeil to P' ' ,i|i ce pilgrinuiges, and the iitralid/i and chililren wh I ' underlake the journey, would, in that ca''e, never *'" AMm- my [)ublic worship. And how could tlic Sabhath iiati ih Indji without some religious service ? A mere cessat .11 from labour would hardly havt; been a complete obse vance of this important conunandment. Fiiim the.se considei'ations we may, I think, safely conclude that the syiuvgogues an vith them the common .schools date their establishment frc he entrance of the Lsraehtes into the promised land. The tradition, ti patriarchal ages, can synagogues already existed in the laidly be founded upon substantial ' I nl ' ii i ! 't ■ 1 . l ;i ' 1 [li ^24 HISTOllV OF HK!M:EW LlTEltATURli:. grounds. Tho patriai-cb 5 wjuulcMecl with their flocks from phice to place, and appiu-cntly never formed themselves into cominunitics. Ah regards the mode of conducting Divine worship, and the use of prayers when the synagogue service was first instituted, all tl)at is advanced upon those subjects must necessai'ily be mere conjecture, as wo have no direct information respecting them. No doubt the reading of the niin (Tordh) //Uio, with exhorta- tions and explanations, formed a prominent part. Extemporary prayers may also have been offered up, and the Psalms after their compiisition furnished many hymns of praise and adora- tion. Tbe liturgy of tbe (yhinese Jews is still very simple, consisting merely of s(;lections from the Bibl(^ The compilation of a proper liturgv wa.-: probably first under- taken by the Great Syriiigogue, which is supposed to have been founded and presided over bj* ^^zra, and was composed of 120 men cliosen from among the most learned of the nation. After that the liturgy received constantly new additions, so that the prayer book now in use among the Jews contains elements belonging to a pei'iod extending over 1,00() years. About the time of the Maccabees — the precise time is very uncertain — the Jews became divided into several religions sectfi ; or. perhaps, more projierly speaking, schooh of thought. Although the origin of these sects is chiefly to be ascribed to difference of opinions on religious questions which gradually sprung up among the ]ieople, yet as state and religion were so intimatel}' connected, it was not long before political aflairs became mixed up with theii* religious differences, which con- tributed ijreatlv to widen tho breach, and to increase the animosity already existing among them. The Phdviset's, if not iilontical with the t3''T'Dn (Ohasidiin) i. e. the pioKfi, mentioned in I Mace. ii. 42, viii. I'i, who, under the Maccabees, defended their relii.',ion with their goods and blood, certainly sprang from them. The term t3''^l"iS (Per- ushim) Phdvisecs denotes Scparafisfs, in reference to their having separated themselves from others who did not so .strict!}^ obsei've the laws of Moses, the oral laws, and the religious rites. They were stricr believers in a Divine Provi- \vledged by tlie .strioteat Pharisees thennselves, and the Talmud contains severer denun- ciations of" them than are to be found in the New Testament, The make-believe pietists are there spoken of an " the plague of Pharisaism; Hnr sin, must have lieeii highly consoling to them. Mucii stress has been laid by some writers on the fact of this influential sect among the Jews rejecting the doctrine of the immortal it If ofthewLil as being very significant ; but from the foregoing cxplunations, it will be seen upon what shallow groni.ds their Ijelief was originally based, as well as the motives which favoured its spreading. T: le Sndducees also denied the existence of angels, and many writers have charged them with rejecting all the books of the Old Testament except the Pentateuch, but there are strong grounds for believing that this charge is unfounded. It is hardly possible that they would have been allowed to hold some of the, chief offices of state, and to act as pi'iests, us many of theTii did, if they liad rejected the greatest portion of their Scriptures. Besides, they attended the Temple services and other religious assemblies where the books of the prophets were rea(l, as well as the books of Moses. Then again, the Pentateuch speaks of angels, and contains passages which argue against other views of theirs, why then not have rejected this also ? Their peculiar views must be rather ascribed to th«'ir mode of interpreting the Scriptures than to their rejection of a large poiiion of it. We find in our days many rejecting the doctrine of the imrtwrtaUti/ of the soul, or even denyimj the existence at a soul at all, who profess to accept the Bible as the word of God in which the term blS^TU (t^heol), occurs over and over again as a designation of the place tvhere departed spirits dwell after death. And we venture to say, it will hardly be denied by any Hebrew schohr, that this is the proper meaning of the word, although it i.», constantly mistranslated in our version by " grave" or " pit.'' Indeed, Uie Sadducees at first partook more of a political than a religious sect, and so long as the Jews possessed political power, the contest between them and the Pharisees was more of a secular than a religious nature. It was only when their nation gradually lost that power, that the Sadducees found it necessary, in order to perpetuate the implacable hatred which had constantly been gathering strength, to have recourse to doctrinal points, as the surest mode of preventing any reconciliation. Now the doctrine of the immortality of the soul, and the resuri-ection of the dead, was held by the Pharisees as a fundamental article of faith, hence the rejection of this aiticle could not fail to increase the animosity, and make it, if possible, even more deeply rooted. The Essenes, although forming but a small fraternity, yet their habits and peculiar mode of life lender their history so far as it can be traced highly interesting. This sect sprung from the Pharisees, but widely diflered from them in various HISTORY OF HEBREW LITERATURE, religious ways. They were not only more strict in their observances, .but they subjected themselves also to a most austere mode of living. Their name is supposed to be derived from the Aramaic verb j^OJj^ or nOi^ (asah) to heal, hence healers, or from the verb nnO {ff^chah) to luaslt, hence bathers. Their motto — which is preserved in the ethics of the Jewish fathers — appears to have been "Mine is thine, and thine is mine." Hence they tolerated no individual possession among themselves, but had everything in connnon. Josephus speaks of them as living in perfect union, and abhornng voluptuous- ness as a fatal passion. They practise celibacy, but adopt the children of others, and very early instil into them their own spirit and maxims. They despise riches and anything approaching to luxury, they have an austere and niortified fiir, but without the least affectation. They always dress in white, and the children they educate are all treated and clothed alike. They are very hospitable to their own sects, so that any of them travelling need not burden themselves with provisions. Their trade is carried on by exchange, giving what is superfluous and receiving in return wha* they need. They begin their daily labour early in the morning after having said their prayers, and work till about eleven o'clock. They then meet together, and having put on white linen they bathe in fresh water, and retire to their cells. From thence they go into their common refectory, which is, as it were, a sacred temple, v here they continue in perfect silence. E.ich is served with his mess, and the priest ofi'ers up a pi'ayer both before and after meals. After their frugal repast, they again take off their white clothes which they wore whilst at table, and return again to their respective work until evening, when they again come to their refectory for their evening meal, sometimes bringing a friend with them. They are strict observeis of their word ; a promise they consider as binding as the most sacred oath. They are especially careful of their sick, never suffering them to want anything. They are very careful in admitting any one into their ^onnnunity. A candidate has to undergo first a year's probation, and then he is only partially admitted, but recjuires a trial of two years more before he is acknowledged as % full member of the sect, when he has to solemnly pronli^;e to observe strictly the laws of piety, justice, and mod(;sty, fidelity to God and their prince, and never to disclose the secrets of the sect to another. The violation of any of the laws is visited with expulsion. Next to God they honour Moses, and show great respect to the aged. They are strict believers in the immortality of the soul, and hold that the souls of good men enjoy certain bliss after death, whilst those of the wicked are sepaiated from them. According to i Iwlrj m ',\ ■'' If ■;• I I i .i 228 HISTORY OF HEBREW LITERATURE. Philo their instructions were principally on holiness, equity, justice, economy, the distinction between good and evil. The three fundamental maxims of their morality are the love of (Jod, of virtue, and of our neighbour. Owing to the simplicity of their diet and the regularity of their lives, they are said to have generally attained a great age. Pliny ascribes a high antiquity to this sect. He observes that they had been many thou.sand years in existence, living without marriage, and with- out the other sex, but had no difficulty in replacing the mem- bers who died as there were always persons ready to join their fraternity, so that the sect rather increased at a most astonish- ing rate without any one boing born among them. Pliny also fixes their principal abode near the Dead Sea. Philo assures us that whilst some were found occasionally to dwell in certain cities, they preferred to live in tlie country, and apply themselves to agriculture, and other laborious exercises, which did not take them from their solitude. THi: cahbalistk; school. The Cabbiilistie school, demands here also our special notice, and this not merely on account of its great antiquity, but more especially on account of the influence which its teaching at all times exercised among the Hebrew nation, and its peculiar mode of interpreting Scriptural passages being even freely adopted among the earl}'^ Christian commentators, as we shall hereafter show, as well as on account of the great amount of literature tiiat emanated from this school. The term nb^P (J^dhhalah) denotes a receiving, and was so called because the Cabbalists maintain that their teaching was received by Moses directly from God on Mount Sii'ai, and who in his turn communicated it to the elders, and these again en- trustere(dc the shell if you will taste the fruit." No wonder, then, that this school should always have foimd so many devoted adherents, when its teachings professes to furnish such knowledge which enables ihe human mind to penetrate in to se( up po [ was so HISTOllY OF HElUtEW LITEUATUllE. 22» into the domain of mysticism. The passed centuries, have too plainly and too painfull}^ demonstrated, the powerful and seductive influence which mystical subjects are a})t to exert upon the human mind, the literate as well as the illiterate are powerless under their charm. How many thousands have become firm believeis in table rapping and spiritual manifesta- tions, and other kindred absurdities ? Most of my readers are no doubt aware of the extraordinary superstition connected with the Caul, (a membrance encompassing the heads of some children when born), though they may perhaps not be awaie how very prevalent it has been even from remote times. Many will no tloubt be surprised when we tell them, that this super- stition was so very prevalent in the primitive church, that St. Chrysostom found it .lecessary l)oth to preach and write against it. But all the eloquence of this father of the church did not avail to eradicate it. In later times, midwives were accustoiiGehe of March 2(Jth, 1881, contained the following advert'sement : "To captains or persons going to sea. A child's Caul for sale in good preserva- ion. As a proof that superstition was not confined merely to the humbler class, we may uiei^tion, that Sir .lohn Uttley, of Madeley Manor, Staffordshire, did, by his will, proved at Doctor's Commons, 1658, devise a Caul set in jewels, which had covered him at his birth, to hi.4 daughter, hereafter to his son, and then to his heirs-male. This Caul was not to be sold out of the family. (Brant's Popular Antiquities, vol. iii.) We have no desire to offer one word of aj)ology for the many Jews who have become firm l>elievers in the most j)ernicious mystic teaching of the Cabbala, far from it, but we wish only to show that superstition was not co'irined to the Hebrews only, nor to antiquity, but that it still exists oven in our times, and that all the learning and wisdom of the IJHli century had M'. 111 i!:i' ■!^< ' " i| 230 HISTORY OF HEBREW LITERATURE, not the power to deprive it of its fascinating influence on the human mind. The Cabbala found at first a fertile soil among the Essena, whose peculiar habits were apparently favourable to its rapid growth. This sect furnished a great many physicians, some of whom gradually began to employ cabbalistic formulas and prayers, instead of ordinary medicines, and having in many cases been very successful with their cures, the Cabbala received all the credit, which by rights ought to have been ascribed to the constitutions of the patients, or the salubrity of the climate. This of course not only tended to make the Cabbala more popular, but made those skilled in it to be looked upon as being invested with supernatural powers, and consequently gieatly revered. The time when the Cabbala was lirst planted into Judea was likewise favourable to ensure for it a Arm hold in the affection of the people. The unfortunate political occui'rences that followed the heroic exploits of the Maccabees had .so utterly dispirited the nation, that the least ray of sunshine that now and then gleamed through the dense overhanging cloud of misery and suffering was nailed with an intense delight. The Cabballists knew how to take advantage of this melancholy state of the country, and as the miraculous cures which they pretended to have perfoimed, in a measure had already paved the way to make the people expect even greater things from this mystic art, it was no difficult task to impose still more upon their credulity. The report of the performance of some miracles by a few of the most eminent Cabbalists had the desired effect of arousing in the breasts of many a hope that their speedy deliverance was close at hand. This hope was strengthened by the fact that among their wonderful perform- ances, notably was the pretended power over evil spirits, and it would naturally be inferred that those invested with such a power, would have no difficulty in expelling the enemy from the country. This will account for the great influence which the Cabbalists afterwards exercised in the political disturbances in Judea, which so soon led to the destruction of Jerusalem and the dispersion of the nation. We have above mentioned that the Essens were fond of the study of medicine, and it is not at all improbable that the sect received its name from the Aramaic verb ij^Qj^ (abbala, although very absurd in many of its deductions, furnishes, nevertheless, a groat amount of exceedingly inter- esting reading, and displays the extraordinary reasoning power and ingenuity of those ancient writers. It assumes even an importence which is not generally accorded to it, when it is taken into consideration that most of the prevailing supersti- tions since the Christian era, may be traced to have their origin either in the Jewish or Christian Cabbala. Such an origin could not fail to invest them with a supposed sacredness, and this will account in a measure, for their obtaining such a com- plete maittery even over men of profound learning and refine- ment. ; The Cabbala, however, like every thing else, merely founded upon the frail foundation of fancy, was sure to feel, sooner or later, the powerful influences of modern enlighternnent. And thus it happened, that iov many years passed, its firm hold upon the human mind has gradually become weaker and weaker, slowly indeed, for a deeply rooted evil of two thousand years' growth rj'^uires time to eradicate, But Cabbalistic superstition has certainly by degrees been disappearing, and even among that class of people who had been accustomed to instil into the minds of their children from their youth a reli- gious veneration for the Cabbala. If we now and then still see tablets with the mystic inscriptionf " Away Lilith," in llebi'ew, in the room of a new born child ; or such like charms against evil spirits or dangers ; these may be looked upon as the last flickering of a dying system striving to live, but sure to die. The different schools of thought would natui'ally exert them- selves to spread their respective teaching, and to make as many converts as possible. This must have greatly contributed to increase the number of schools and seminaries. The trans- mission of the traditions was directly entrusted to the heads of the Sanhedrim, who established schools for the instruction of grown up young men, in which much of the time was devoted to the illustration of the Scriptures. There were in those early days no schools for females, the instruction of those was left to be carried on at their homes. The oldest noted school of which we have any reliable account was the one presided over by Shemaja and Abtalion, who flourished about a half a centuiy before the Christian era. They are often mentioned in the Talmud, and some of their favourite moral sayings are still preserved in the tTil^^ "DIS * Questiones ad Antioch apud Athan. T. ii., p. 226. t ;'' ' t^ t Lilith, a supposed spirit inimical to new born childreu. HISTOHY OF HEBUKW LlTEhATUKE. 23d ,"i (Pirke Avoth), i.e., the ethics of the Jeiviah Fathers. The former was fond of inculcating a love for labour, a hatred for power, and the desire of riches, whilst the latter used to impress upon his pupils the necessity for public teachers to be careful of their insti'uction, lest they might draw wrong conclusions and their disciples imbibe them, and the name of heaven be thereby profaned. One of the most eminent disciples of this school was the famous Rabbi HiUel, surnamed the Babylonian, as he came from that country. It is related of him that his parents were but very poor, though on his mother's side he was descended from the royal house of David, and that at the age of forty he came to Jerusalem to study the Scriptures. By means of daily labour he managed to earn sufficient to maintain himself and to pay the door-keeper of the school. This was the case with other celebrated Rabbis, and it shews that the learned men of that time were not ashamed to belong to the working class. Shortly after Herod had mounted the throne Hillel was elected Nasi, or President of the Sanhedrim, which office, it is said, he held for forty years. He is always spoken of as being of n, njost gentle disposition, very patient and simple hearted. Some of his most favourite sayings, which are I'ecorded in the ethics of the Jewish Fathers {Pirke Avoth) were: "Be of the pupils of Aaron, a lover of pence, a i)romoter of peace, loving mankind, and bringing them nearer to the law." Pirke Avoth, i, 12, " Do not judge thy neighbour until thou hast been in his place." (Pirke Avoth, ii, 5.) Jt is also related of him that at one time a heathen in the spirit of mockery, had asked him " whether he could teach him all the laiu of Moses whilst he could stand upon one leg," whereupon Hillel quickly replied, " Do not unto others as thou wouldst not have others do unto thee ; that is all the law, the rest is mere comment." (Babyl., Talmud, Shabb. 31, a.) The two eminent Rabbis Menachem and Shamai had also received their education in the same school. The latter attained to the high office of Supreme Judge of the Sanhedrim during the Presidency of Hillel, and founded a school in Jerusalem. Hillel, who had also founded a school, being meek and kind hearted, accordingly in expounding the laws invested them with mercy and forbearance whenever such was possible, whilst, on the other, his rival teacher Shamai, who was harsh and rigid, favoured the carrying out of the law strictly and in its utmost severity. Hence, whilst the former was loved by all for his gentleness and kindness, the latter was feared for his harshness and rigidity. Of the two Hillel was by far the most learned, and consequently his opinion always carried great weight in the Sanhedrim and with the public in general. The number I 'it' • 28« HISTOUY OK IIKHKEW I.ITEUATUKE. of his pupils is givon r« one thonsantl ; of those eighty ohtaim-d high distinction, and among tlicm Jonathan ben U.siel, the author of the Chaldee version of the greatest portion of the Old Testament, who was ccsrtainly tlie most felehratcul t»f them all. Another of the most famous schools of that jieriod was that of Gamaliel — the Greek form of the Hebrew name, ^^i^TJ!! (Gamliel) i.e. a reward of Ood — who was a grandson of Hillel. This celebrated teacher had inherited his grandfather's gentle- ness and kindness, virtues which greatly influenced his actions whilst presiding over the Sanhedrim. The ordinances which were enacted during his lifetime bore the stamp of liberality and humanity, which will put to blush some Christian govern- ments of this enlightened age. Of these the laws respecting the treatment of the Gentiles, which were inaugurated by him are especially worthy of notice. It was enacted that hereafter both Gentile and Jew, without any distinction, should be allowed to gather the gleanings of the harvest field, and the former as well as the latter should be greeted with the custom- ary salutatioH of 2>('(t<'('. It was further enacted, that the poor of the Gentile should be as carefully attendeil to, his .sick treated with the same care, his dead to be buried, and his mourners to be coujforted, just as if they belonged to their own community. (See (iittiu, 5!) b. Gl ft'.; Jer. Gitt. c. 5.) Gamaliel, like his grandfather, took the Mo.saic injunction: " But thou shalt love thy neighbour as thyself," as his motto, and ever strove to .shape his actions accordingly. The Chris- tian church has paid Givnialiel the great honour of recording his interposition in behalf of the Apostles, Acts v, 34-39 ; and his conduct on that occasion affords a stiikiug proof of his great influence in the Sanhedrim, and how highly he must have been respected b\'' his nation. Gamaliel died about seventeen years before the destruction of the Temple, and his memory has always been held in great honour*. About this time was executed the famous fihaldee version of the Old Testament, called Targum. The term QliilFi (Targum) merely denotes a translation, and was at first applied to any kind of translation, but after the execution of the Chaldee ver.sion it became restricted to this version alone. As we shall frequently have to refer to this version, a few remarks regarding its origin will not be out of place here. We have already stated, that during the Babyloni.sh captivity the Jews had forgotten their native language, when, therefore, on their return to their own country public services were again estab- lished, in which the reading of Scripture in the original Hebrew formed an essential part, it became necessary to have the portions thus reail, translated into Chaldee, in order that the ordinary [)eoplc might derive the full benefit of it. Wheth- 1 version HISTORY OF IlKRUKW LITKHATUUF. 2:57 er any of these orol tranHldtions had been eoinmitted to writ- ing wo luvve no inean.s of aseertainiii}»; certain it i.s, there is no truce of any older translation tlian the pre.sont Chaldfo version. The tnuKslation of the Pentateuch is ascribed to Onkelos, who was a pupil of IJaiiialicl. 'J'his translation i.s always spoken of as t/ir Tdiynui of OtikcloH. It is a very excelh-nt translation, adln'rin<^ as closely >is possible to the orii.'inal, and was evidently intended for the people in general, for in some cases where the iiieajunif is not (juite clear, a paraphrastic rendering is given in order to bring out the meaning more clearly. There is very little known of the life of Onkelos, and notliing whatt'ver of his fanuly. One circumstance, however, is recorded of him which shows the great esteem in which lie held his master Gamaliel. It is said tliat he expended a large sum on very costly incense, which he burned at the grave when his master was buried, an honour wliich was only shown in those days to kings. The other books of the Old Testament were translated by .Jonathan ben Uzziel, who, as we have already hinted, is said to have been the most learned of ilillel's pupils. This transla- tion, although noi so literal as that of Onkelos, is nevertheless liighly esteemed for its excellency. In Biblical criticism these Targums are of very great intportance, since they often assist in arriving at the proper meaning of certain passages or of particular words, or at any rate show in whatsen.se they were taken by the Jews at that time. They serve further to vindi- cate the Hebrew text, as it has come down to us, against the groundless and absurd charge, which some writers have made, that 'the present text has been corrupted by the Jews for controversial purjxises." Very little can be gathered fiom the RabV»inical writings concerning the life of this eminent scholar. What we find recorded of him chiefly refers to his ehaiitableness and kind heartedness. For instance, it is related that a rich man had disinherited his .sons on account of their bad conduct, and left all his property to Jonathan, who, after liaving taken pos.session of it, kept one-third to himself, one- third he gave to the sanctuary, and one-third he made a present of to the heirs. Rabbi Shamaja, of whom we have already spoken as being very austere, upbraided him for having acted against the wdl of the deceased. But Jonathan explained that it was his practice to deal in this manner with all his propert}', and that it was from this that he made the gift and in no wi.se overstepped the will of his benefactor. Although we have no positive information that the study of foreign languages formed a part of the higher education in the 33 J Kti ilii .1 '1 1 A ; '1 ii i ii 111 1^. ;it -2M8 HISTORY OF HEBREW LITERATURE. seminaries of those times, yet it is certain that many of the Hebrews possessed a knowledge of some of them. It is dis- tinctly asserted that every member of the Sanhedrim was conv'N.s.fit with several foreign langiinges, and that judgi.s espt eiilly were required to understand some of them. During the terrible and e\ entful times preceding the destruc- tion of Jerusalem both Rabbis and students took active part, in the defence of their beloved country, and many lost their lives whilst l)ravely fighting. Among those that escaped the ()0 axioms. His piireats being very jioor, he learned the tr.ule of a cooper, at which he continued to work even when his profound learning jio hmger rendered .such labour neces.sary. He loved maniuil labour, and endeavoiu'ed to infuse a taste for it in his students, ;nid in order to bring Ins views on this point in a lively manner befori^ his pupils, l)e brought always a newly finished baiTe! in HISTORY OF IIKHUKW LITKHATUUK. 239 iiy of th(! It is (lis- liiiu was lat judgoH 10 deatruc- ctive part lost tlieir leaped the being tlie )giU's ami 'lu'ial, and H. Sinu'Oii ty inlu'Ht- Vivh'.r; U. named, the hhalist. s were not o come in lieiv abo that iie was stori/. He Hdtii.,) i. €., ;rits of it ii Jebudah ioniM. His '(-oper, at d h'ariung ■d uuinnal MiuikntH, y manner barrel in the hi'cture-room which lie used as a professor's eliair, whilst he fretjuently spoke of the nsefulni^ss and importance of manual lebour. " Behohl," he W(add often say, " How nolile a h'ade is ! it broui^ht it8 master ^^reat honour," (Tal. Nedarim f. 50, I.) It is said, that he had attendei) the lectures of idl the most emimnit teachers before the destruction of lieihar by the Romans. He made Leviticus a special study, and wrot(^ a eoin- mentary on it entith'd Sii>hr(i. We have alreaily statecl that HiUel, when he came from Habylon to .Ierusa!'::i to pursue his studies, had to perform daily labour to (iani a living ; and we might njenti(ni many other Rabbis who learned trades, and worked at tliem whilst they were at the same time pursiiing their studies, and acted as teachers in the dlHerent si';its of learning. We have luid many instances of this kind in our days, matuial lal>our and study being carried on togethei- successfully. Many of tile inhabitants who escaped from Jerusali«m took up their abode at Tiberias, juid i'stablished there now congre- gations, and it became as it were a second Jerusalem. It is supposed that Rabbi Oariialiel Hed to this ])lac<'. Here the Jews re-est:ii)li.shed thv' Sanhedrim presided over by thre(^ officers of diH'erent grades. Rabbi Simeon ben (janialiel the younger, became Nat^i or Pdtriarch., Rabbi Nathan became Av-be,th-(lln, or Ilciid of Jvaf/mcnt, and Hubbi Meir b(>came I 'kacliau., ov Chief (Jouiisnlloi'. Tiberias became famou.-; sdso for the .seat of learning which was establislied there. It being the .seat of Sanhedrim iiiJiuy of the uios^ eminent ofthr Rabbis came to dwell there, and lectured in tliat academy. Tlir seat of learning at Tiberias was always regarded as the most celebrated of all the Jewish schools in the Kast, jind its d(>gi-e(\s were esteemed far more than thosi' grant-d in an}' other aeadtuny, hence many students left Jamnia and Lydda, and came to Tiberias to study. [n the secoml century tiieic sprajig up an acadhiind, ;uid v\ ij) nrei-ssariK' have to do .so again, it may {.ierha})s not })rove uninteresting to iiumy of my rea'"lT (^arit-nii,) i e., .srcf/.s', is again subdivided into eleven minor divisions, which contain in all no less than seventy-five chapters. The first ^.ubdivisioi, is termed ^■y^'^^'^iBcvdcholJi.) i. e., blesfiiinjtt, and contains 'aws appei-taining as to whei-e, when, ami how the prayers ai"e to be ofi'ere coru'-rs of the field which were to be left standing for the poor, and these founded on J)eut. xxiv, 19, 20, 21. relating to the fruitw that were to be left for the stranger, the, fatherless, and the widow, at the time of r: 'MM HISTORY OF HKIUIEVV LITEHATURE. 241 gathering, are especially laid down with great precission, and are very nunieroiis. The second diuislon called, 13?l?a (Alocd) i. e., feasts, has twelve subdivisions all of which contain laws on the propei- observance of the different festivals and lasts, and contain in all eighty-eight chapters. The first subdivision, termed {mSTT {S/ud>hot/i,) i. e., S(d>lMdh, einltraces all the laws appertaining to th(3 strict keeping of the Sal)l)ath, and contains n(» less than twenty-four chapters. The Oral Laws relating to what work may be done on the Sabbath, and what is forbidden, ai-c ex- ceedingly numerous. There ai-e, in the fii'st place, fli i rfij-iiitie l)i'i)icip(d oc('ups which ai-e forbidden. Hut besides these any analogous work which can be rang(id inider any one of the principal occupations, is likewise prohibited. Let us, for example, instance the jjvinrijxd onritpid/oii of pJoiifjIiiiir/ to improve tin; ground, and make it fit to receive the seed, now as this i.s prohibited, hence any other work vvhieh may tend to produce a similar result, .such as digging, weeding, gathering wood or stones from a field, no matter how siruiU the quantity and such liki; work are ecpially forbidden. The third division, cnUvd )jt'fr;.'2 (Nasliivi,) i. c., tvoraen or tcives, has seven subdivisions. Five of these treat on the laws concerning betrothal, marriage, divorce, and everything that in any way appertains to these subjects. The othei* two, contain laws respecting vows which are binding or not binding, and respecting vows of abstinence ; nuiking up in all seventy- one chapters. The treatise \ehamoth, which contains the laws regarding the obligations of a brother marrying the childless widow of a deceased brother, contains also certain rules which are ni> doubt intended to be explanatory of Lev. xviii, IH, the import of which has given rise to so much conti'overs}', as many, con- trary to the opinion of n)ost Hebrew scholars, have supposed it sets forth a prohibition against marrying a '/''craswi 'y/'/"e',s' '■iister. The ruies laid down in the tri-atise clearly show that such mari'iages were not only consi;es have now — and in my opinion wisely — been legalized in this country, we will subjoin here a few of the rules. '■ If a man, whose "dfe is gone to a country beyond the sea, is informed that his wife is dtsad, and he marries her sistei-, and after that his wife comes back she may return to him. * * * After the death of his first wife he may, however, marry again the second wife." And again, " If ou being told of the death of his wife he had married her sister, but being liliil :, i ! ^ 242 HISTORY OF IIKHUEW LITEKATUKE. 1 ^ afterwards iiifornuMl that she had been alive at the time he liful married the sister, but is now dead, then any child born before the death )f the first wife is illegitimate, but not those born after death." (See Talmud, treatise Yebamoth, Tom. v. p. <)4.) The Jmirfk treatise called "I^piTS (iVcsi /an), i.e., dam ages, has ten subdivisions. They all treat on civil and penal laws, and are intended both to supplement and to explain the civil and penal laws recorded in tin; Pentateuch. The first three are called /A,) /. c, etiiica of the fo titers, contains, as tliu name import^, pcccepts and maxims of the ancient llal»))is. They are ht'ld in ntii- versal esteem hy the Jews, 8o nnich so triat we somctinirs find them publislied in connection Avith their (hiily pniyor I'ook. and directed to be read at^ stated times. The readc;!' has had some specimens of them, hut we will subjoin a few more. " Rabbi Simeon said, there are three diadtiins, the diadi>iii dI" the law, the diadem of the priesthood, and the diadem (jt royalty, but the diadem of a ^'ood name surpasses all thcst'." "Jehudah, the son of Temah, said, be strong as a Niopai'd, swift as an eagle, fleet as a docjr, and brave as a lion, to do the will of t!iy Father, who is in Uiiav(Mi." " Rabin Jehoshua said, the evil eye and the evil thought, and the hatred of the covenant, are driving men froiu the world." " Rabbi Simeon, the .son of Gawialiel, .said, the world is founded upon three thing.v, ikouc/ij upon truth, u])on jiidj;- ment, and upon peace. Ah it is .said, let truth and right judg- ment prevail in your gates." "Rabbi Jacob said, this world is like an antechamber to the world to'come, therefore prepare thyself in the antechambtsr, so that thou niayest be gathered into the festive-chatidjer." The Jifth treatise, called QiinD {I'^edasfdin) i.e., sacred things, has eleven sub-divisions all of which contain laws concerning things devoted to (jiod, and concerning the various sacrifices and everything appertaining to them. The sub-; ,':raciiiig of un- eleanne.ss of utensils, (ilothing, dwellings, and vessels, and tiieir various modes of purification has ahne thirty chapters. In the subdi\ision (V(((l